Case Name: In the Matter of Five Towns Wines & Liquors, Inc., Petitioner, v. New York State Liquor Authority, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2014-10-23
Citations: 121 A.D.3d 553
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Five Towns Wines & Liquors, Inc., Petitioner, v New York State Liquor Authority, Respondent.
Judges: Concur — Gonzalez, RJ., Mazzarelli, Andrias, DeGrasse and Clark, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 121
Pages: 553–554

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Five Towns Wines & Liquors, Inc., Petitioner, v New York State Liquor Authority, Respondent.
[995 NYS2d 16]

Opinion:
Determination of respondent, dated August 27, 2013, sustaining the charge of a violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) and imposing a $2,000 civil penalty, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Shlomo Hagler, J.], entered on or about Jan. 27, 2014), dismissed, without costs.
Respondent's finding that petitioner sold an alcoholic beverage to a person under the age of 21 in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) is supported by substantial evidence (see Matter of S & R Lake Lounge v New York State Liq. Auth., 87 NY2d 206 [1995]). The uncontroverted testimony of a police officer involved in the undercover operation was corroborated by a copy of the undercover agent's driver's license and the marked $20 bill recovered from petitioner's retail liquor store. The officer, who knew the agent was 18 years old based on her driver's license, observed the agent enter the store and emerge approximately two minutes later carrying a paper bag with a bottle of red wine in it, after which the officer arrested a person matching the agent's description of the person who had sold her the alcohol. Petitioner's president confirmed that the person arrested at the scene was working at the store that night; he offered no evidence to contradict the officer's testimony.
Concur — Gonzalez, RJ., Mazzarelli, Andrias, DeGrasse and Clark, JJ.