Case ID: liquor-tax-rep_3/html/0145-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

First Appellate Department,
    May, 1903.
    Reported. 83 App. Div. 643.
    In the Matter of the Petition of Patrick W. Cullinan, as State Commissioner of Excise of the State of New York, Respondent, for an Order Revoking and Canceling Liquor Tax Certificate No. 9,047, Issued to Max Trager, Appellant.
    
      M. 8. Guiterman, for appellant.
    Certificate represents property and is protected by the general rules of law in any proceeding having for its object its forfeiture or destruction. (Matter of Kray, 82 App Div. 445; Matter of Hilliard, 25 App. Div, 222.) By filing a verified answer the appellant waived his constitutional rights but the conscience of the court should" be convinced. (Matter of Henry, 56 App. Div. 268.)
    
      Herbert H. Kellogg, for respondent.
    A police officer entering on Sunday through unlocked doors from the street and hallway, found persons drinking in a room behind the barroom and connected with it by an unlocked swing door. He tasted the drinks and found them whiskey. He arrested the proprietor who was there.
    An open entrance to the room or rooms where liquors were sold was unlawfully permitted. (Matter of Cullinan v. Schepper & Co., 68 App. Div., 119.)
    The sale of liquor was established by convincing circumstantial evidence. (Amerman v. Kall, 34 Hun, 126; Smith v. Reynolds, 8 Hun, 129; Commonwealth v. Nichols, 10 Metc. 259; State v. Brown, 31 Me. 520; Black on Intoxicating Liquors, § 500.) If there is any evidence to sustain the findings of fact below, this court will not disturb the decision. (In re Lyman, 62 App. Div. 616; Gleason v. Morrison, 30 N. Y. St. Rep. 617; Sherwood v. Hauser, 94 N. Y. 626; Slatterly v. Haskins, 3 App. Div. 48; Mann v. City of Brooklyn, 45 N. Y. St. Rep. 14; Hall v. Canary, 38 N. Y. St. Rep. 466; Matter of Lyman v. Crowley, 62 App. Div. 616.) If the Liquor Tax Law has been violated the court must revoke the certificate. (Matter of Lyman v. Texter, 32 Misc. 210; affd. 59 App. Div. 217; People ex rel. Gentilesco v. The Excise Board, 7 Misc. 315; Lyman v. Perlmutter, 166 N. Y. 410; Lyman v. Erie Co. Athletic Club, 46 App. Div. 387, affd. 163 N. Y. 552.)
   Order affirmed, with costs.

Ho opinion.