Hyperlawhypertext legal database Cullinan v. Devito 99 N.Y.S. 976

← Cases

Cullinan v. Devito

99 N.Y.S. 976 Court N.Y. Sup. Ct. Decision date 1905-07-28 English

Delivered by GIEGERICH, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 976
CULLINAN, Excise Com’r, v. DEVITO.
(Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County.
July 28, 1905.)

Headnote

Intoxicating Liquors—Revocation of Tax Certificate—Procedure.
The proceeding by the state commissioner of excise to revoke a liquor tax certificate is summary in its nature, and any stay granted on motion of the defendant should be after the coming in of the referee’s report.
Appeal from Special Term.
Action by Patrick W. Cullinan, state commissioner of excise, against one Devito. From an order revoking the license, defendant appeals and moves for a stay.
Motion denied. •
Paskus & Cohen (Arthur B. Hyman, of counsel), for the motion.
Herbert H. Kellogg and Albert O. Briggs, opposed.

I consider the prospect of a reversal of the order appealed from so slender as not to warrant a stay of the hearings before the referee. Besides, such a proceeding as this is intended to be summary (Lyman v. Erie County Athletic Club, 46 App. Div. 387 , 394, 61 N. Y. Supp. 884 , affirmed in 163 N. Y. 552 , 57 N. E. 1115 ), and if delay is permitted the purpose of the statute is defeated. If any stay is to be granted, it should be upon the coming in of the referee’s report, and not now.

Motion denied, without costs.

Cases cited