Schenley Industries, Inc. v. State Liquor Authority

Respondent State Liquor Authority instituted a proceeding against the petitioner, claiming that petitioner violated section 101 (subd. 1, par. [c]) of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Law and rule 11 of the Rules of the State Liquor Authority (9 NYCRR 86). After a hearing respondent decided that there was such a violation and issued a warning to respondent together with a bond claim for $2,500.

In this review pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR, petitioner claims that the statutory section and the rule promulgated in implementation of it are void as being an unconstitutional delegation of…