In re Clement
New York Supreme Court
Application by the state commissioner of excise for an order revoking and cancelling a liquor tax certificate upon the ground that the holder of the certificate, made a misrepresentation in the statement made for the same in that he alleged that there were twelve buildings occupied exclusively for dwellings, each of whose nearest entrance to the premises in which traffic in liquor was to be carried on was within 200' feet measured in a straight line from the said premises in…
Read the full summary
Application by the state commissioner of excise for an order revoking and cancelling a liquor tax certificate upon the ground that the holder of the certificate, made a misrepresentation in the statement made for the same in that he alleged that there were twelve buildings occupied exclusively for dwellings, each of whose nearest entrance to the premises in which traffic in liquor was to be carried on was within 200' feet measured in a straight line from the said premises in which traffic in liquor was to be carried on, whereas there were only ten such buildings; and on the further ground…
1Opinion of the CourtDeAngelis, J.
I think that the error made by the holder of the certicate in his statement, that there were twelve buildings instead of' ten buildings within the 200-foot space, is immaterial, if the consents of the owners of two-thirds of the ten buildings are valid; in other words, if the consents of the owners of seven such buildings are valid. This narrows the contro*565versy down to the question whether or not persons in possession of their houses and lots under contracts for the purchase of the same are owners thereof within the meaning of the Liquor Tax Law.
The petitioner insists that “ owner,” as used…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pelton v. . Westchester Fire Insurance CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- In re SherryNew York Supreme Court · 1898