Majority
Order and judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court correctly determined that a commercial vendor cannot be held liable under section 11-100 or 11-101 of the General Obligations Law absent proof that it sold alcoholic beverages directly to the alleged tort-feasor (General Obligations Law § 11-101; see also, Smith v Guli, 117 AD2d 1017 ; Lee v Holloway, 146 Misc 2d 455 ) or that it unlawfully furnished such beverages to an under-age person alleged to be the tort-feasor (General Obligations Law § 11-100).
The court did not abuse its discretion by entertaining defendant’s application to renew a prior motion for summary judgment. The prior motion was denied because the court concluded that a factual issue existed whether the intoxicated
Cases cited
- Lee v. Holloway 146 Misc 2d 455 p. 846
- Sciascia v. Nevins 130 AD2d 649 p. 847