[DOWNLOAD] "Matter Edward A. Fredette Et Al. v. Donald S. Hostetter Et Al." by Supreme Court of New York # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Matter Edward A. Fredette Et Al. v. Donald S. Hostetter Et Al.
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 01, 1971
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 69 KB
Description
Memorandum: Petitioners were notified by the Authority that their application for an on-premises liquor license was disapproved
without prejudice because of a pending investigation of gambling activities involving the current licensee. They requested
the Authority to reconsider its action. After reconsideration, the Authority disapproved the application on the merits because
of the history of gambling activities involving the current licensee, because it was not satisfied that the sale to petitioners
was a bona fide transaction, and that the petitioners had the financing, experience or time necessary properly to supervise
the business. The trial court found that the Authority should have limited its review to the pending gambling investigation
or given petitioners an opportunity to refute the other reasons given for disapproval and remitted the matter to the Authority
for further proceedings. We find nothing improper about the Authority reconsidering the entire application on the merits.
The first notice of disapproval stated that it was because of the pending gambling investigation. The reasons set forth in
the second notice of disapproval were related to the pending investigation and were important considerations on whether the
business could be run independently of influence from the current licensee. Petitioners were given an adequate opportunity
to present all relevant facts and were not entitled to a quasi-judicial hearing. (Matter of Fink v. Cole, 1 N.Y.2d 48; Matter
of Moltzen v. Hostetter, 24 A.D.2d 1018, affd. 18 N.Y.2d 629.) The issue presented is whether there was a rational basis for
the Authority's determination. (Matter of 125 Bar Corp. v. State Liq. Auth., 24 N.Y.2d 174; Matter of Sled Hill Cafe v. Hostetter,
22 N.Y.2d 607.) The record supports the finding that the current licensee engaged in gambling activities. Therefore, a bona
fide transfer was an important consideration. (Matter of Stuart & Stuart v. State Liq. Auth., 32 A.D.2d 912.) The finding
that there was not a bona fide sale is supported, since the only consideration for the goodwill was one dollar and the rent
to be paid to the current licensee's father was $7,200 per year. Also, petitioners had no experience in managing such a business,
and their financing, consisting mostly of borrowed funds, was inadequate. This also was an important consideration. (Matter
of Farone v. State Liq. Auth., 30 A.D.2d 752; Matter of Graziani v. Rohan, 10 A.D.2d 154.) Under all the circumstances, there
was a rational basis for the determination, and it was not arbitrary and capricious. (Matter of Farone v. State Liq. Auth.,
supra ; Matter of Intino v. Hostetter, 29 A.D.2d 625.) Disposition Order unanimously reversed, without costs, petition dismissed
and determination reinstated.