Case ID: liquor-tax-rep_3/html/0069-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Blanchard, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Supreme Court, New York Special Term,
    January, 1903.
    Reported. 39 Misc. 646.
    Matter of the Petition of Patrick W. Cullinan, as State Commissioner of Excise, for an Order Revoking and Cancelling Liquor Tax Certificate No. 11,129, Issued to Thomas Eustace and transferred to John Campbell.
    Liquor Tax Law—False statement that a building, to be used as a hotel, complied with the statute.
    A statement, of a person desirous of becoming a transferee of a liquor tax certificate and intending to conduct a hotel, made in his application to the effect that the building in which he is to carry on his hotel complied with the statutory requirements in regard to a hotel, is material and irrevocable.
    Where the answer of the proposed transferee fails to deny the excise commissioner’s allegation that the building did not comply with the statute there is no material issue before the court and it will, without a reference and upon proof of mere formal matters, revoke the certificate.
    Application by the State Commissioner of Excise for an order revoking and cancelling a liquor tax certificate.
    H. H. Kellogg, for petitioner.
    Guggenheimer, Untennyer & Marshall, for respondent.
   Blanchard, J.

This is an application by the State Commissioner of Excise for an order revoking and cancelling a liqnor tax certificate for false statements made by Campbell in his application for a transfer of a license to him. The false statements claimed by the petitioner are in answer to questions 20, 24 and 25. The respondent stated in his answer to these questions that he intended to “ carry on a bona fide hotel ” on the premises, and ' that such hotel complied with the requisites provided by the • statute for hotels. The answer, in effect, denies that any material statement was false. It does not contain any denial of the fact that the building did not comply with the statute. The respondent is bound by the statements in his application as to the nature of the license sought, and he cannot now claim it was not for the purpose as stated in the application. Matter of Barnard, 48 App. Div. 423. In this aspect of the case the eomplianee of the building in which the traffic in liquor was to be conducted with the requisites provided by the statute was material, and the failure of the answer to contain a sufficient denial of the alleged false statements entitles the petitioner to the relief sought. Liquor Tax Law, L. 1896, ch. 112, § 28, as amd. L. 1901, ch. 640, § 5. As no issue is presented except as to matters of formal proof, no reference is necessary. Matter of Auerbach v. Johannsen, 31 Misc. Rep. 44; Matter of Bridge v. Mohrmann, 36 App. Div. 533. The proof on the formal matters may be made to the court before the final order of revocation is made. The application of the petitioner should be granted.

Application granted.