New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118 (2026)

Revocation of licenses for cause

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 118. Revocation of licenses for cause. 1. Any license or permit
issued pursuant to this chapter may be revoked, cancelled, suspended
and/or subjected to the imposition of a civil penalty for cause, and
must be revoked for the following causes:
  (a) Conviction of the licensee, permittee or his agent or employee for
selling any illegal alcoholic beverages on the premises licensed.
  (b) For transferring, assigning or hypothecating a license or permit.
  2. Notwithstanding the issuance of a license or permit by way of
renewal, the liquor authority may revoke, cancel or suspend such license
or permit and/or may impose a civil penalty against any holder of such
license or permit, as prescribed by this section and section one hundred
nineteen of this chapter, for causes or violations occurring during the
license period immediately preceding the issuance of such license or
permit, and may recover, as provided in section one hundred twelve of
this chapter, the penal sum of the bond on file during said period.
  3. (a) As used in this section, the term "for cause" shall also
include the existence of a sustained and continuing pattern of noise,
disturbance, misconduct, or disorder on or about the licensed premises,
related to the operation of the premises or the conduct of its patrons,
which adversely affects the health, welfare or safety of the inhabitants
of the area in which such licensed premises are located.
  (b) (i) As used in this section, the term "for cause" shall also
include, for licensees that sell alcoholic beverages for on premises
consumption, deliberately misleading the authority:
  (A) as to the nature and character of the business to be operated on
the licensed premises; or
  (B) by substantially altering the nature or character of such business
at the licensed premises during the licensing period without seeking
appropriate approvals from the authority.
  (ii) As used in this subdivision, the term "substantially altering the
nature or character" of such business shall mean any significant
alteration in the scope of business activities conducted at a licensed
premises that would require obtaining an alternate form of license.
  (c) As used in this section, the term "for cause" shall also include a
licensee's or permittee's failure to cure a violation of law or rule in
the time period prescribed by the authority pursuant to subdivision six
of this section.
  4. As used in this chapter, the existence of a sustained and
continuing pattern of noise, disturbance, misconduct, or disorder on or
about the licensed premises, related to the operation of the premises or
the conduct of its patrons, will be presumed upon the sixth incident
reported to the authority by a law enforcement agency of noise or
disturbance or misconduct or disorder on or about the licensed premises
or related to the operation of the premises or the conduct of its
patrons, in any sixty day period, absent clear and convincing evidence
of either fraudulent intent on the part of any complainant or a factual
error with respect to the content of any report concerning such
complaint relied upon by the authority.
  5. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter to the
contrary, a suspension imposed under this section against the holder of
a license issued under section sixty-one-a of this chapter shall only
suspend the licensed activities related to the type of alcoholic
beverage involved in the violation resulting in the suspension.
  6. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, in lieu of
commencement of a disciplinary proceeding against a licensee or
permittee, for a first-time violation of either a provision of this
chapter or a rule of the authority that is deemed by the authority under
its discretion to be de minimis under the circumstances, and is related
to (i) an administrative process, or (ii) paperwork requested or
received by the authority, or (iii) acts or omissions of the licensee or
permittee, the authority shall provide a cure period or other
opportunity for ameliorative action if the violation can be corrected.
  (b) Upon such first-time violation, the authority shall (i) provide
the licensee with a copy of the applicable law or rule and any other
helpful guidance or information explaining such law or rule, to the
extent such materials exist, or (ii) to the extent practicable, provide
such licensee assistance with compliance with the law or the authority's
rules.
  (c) The authority shall have the discretion to determine the
appropriate period of time to allow such licensee to cure or take such
other ameliorative action to address such violation, which shall be
reasonable but shall not be less than fifteen business days and not more
than twenty business days, unless a longer period is allowed pursuant to
law or regulation.
  (d) No waiver of penalties or cure period or other opportunity for
ameliorative action may be given if the authority determines that such
violation may result in serious actual harm, or may present an
endangerment to public safety, human health or the environment, is a
violation of human or civil rights law, results in loss of employee
wages or benefits, interferes with any remedy, review, or resolution
related to harassment or discrimination claims, was or is a willful
violation, involves tax fraud, violates requirements related to federal
funding to the state, relates to state funding or procurement, is
similar to prior violations, is a penal law violation, relates to a
material or substantive portion of the licensee's business, or is in
contravention of the public interest and/or policy reflected by the
authority's mission.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 21 cases, 1985–2020 · leading case: Matter of MJS Sports Bar & Grill, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Auth. Div. of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 129 A.D.3d 1368 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Matter of MJS Sports Bar & Grill, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Auth. Div. of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 129 A.D.3d 1368 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015). · cites it 7× “Based upon a series of incidents between January 2010 and October 2011, the Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control instituted a proceeding to cancel or revoke petitioner’s license for violations of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118 (1) and (3) and rule 36.”

Matter of Mario Enters., Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 2020 NY Slip Op 08146 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020). · cites it 3× “1 [q]), pattern of misconduct ( see Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118 [1], [3]) and 100 charges of unlawfully providing alcohol to an individual under the age of 21 ( see Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 [1]).”

Beer Garden, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Auth., 79 N.Y.2d 266 (NY 1992). “The first grants the SLA the authority to "revoke, cancel or suspend for cause any license or permit” (Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 17 [3]); the second requires the SLA to prepare and furnish to each licensee a statement of the causes for which a license may be revoked…”

MGN, LLC v. New York State Liquor Auth., 81 A.D.3d 492 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). “3); that there was a continuing pattern of disorder and misconduct around the premises adversely affecting the community (see Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118 [1], [3]); and that it failed to exercise adequate supervision over the conduct of its licensed business in…”

Jericho Pub, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Auth., 4 A.D.3d 228 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004). “Substantial evidence, including the testimony of at least two witnesses, established that petitioner permitted a continuing pattern of excessive noise to occur in the subject premises in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118 (3) and 9 NYCRR 53.”

Braden Food & Drink, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Auth., 72 A.D.3d 956 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). “Since the Authority did not appeal the judgment dated March 5, 2009, the only issue on this appeal is whether the Supreme Court correctly determined, in the judgment dated June 9, 2009, that cancellation is “no different” from revocation. The Supreme Court was correct and, thus,…”

Matter of Platinum Pleasures of NY, Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 126 A.D.3d 587 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015). “Petitioner’s argument that the misrepresentation in its original application is outside the applicable limitations period (see Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118 [2]) is unpreserved and in any event without merit.”

Matter of Joseph Paul Winery, Inc. v. State of New York, 135 A.D.3d 639 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). “1 (q), as asserted in charge 3, and which adversely affected the health, welfare, or safety of neighborhood residents, in violation of Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118 (1) and (3), as asserted in charge 4 (see id.”

Dark Horse II, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Auth., 238 A.D.2d 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997). “In September 1995, the Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control instituted a proceeding pursuant to Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118 to revoke petitioner’s liquor license upon the ground that on October 19, 1994 and October 20, 1994 petitioner violated Alcoholic Beverage…”

Desiderio's Parklane Pizzeria, Inc. v. Duffy, 143 A.D.2d 508 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988). “Memorandum: Petitioner was served with a notice of pleading and an amended notice of pleading pursuant to Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118 in connection with proceedings to revoke its liquor license.”

Matter of Last Train Stop, Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 2018 NY Slip Op 3364 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018). · cites it 4× “DECISION & JUDGMENT Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review so much of a determination of the New York State Liquor Authority dated November 9, 2015, as adopted the recommendation of an administrative law judge dated July 13, 2015, made after a hearing, sustaining two…”

Today's Lounge of Oneonta, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Auth., 103 A.D.3d 1082 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). “In our view, the foregoing provides substantial evidence to support the charges of violating Alcoholic Beverage Control Law *1084 § 65 (1), as well as 9 NYCRR 48.”

Show all 21 citing cases →

— N.Y. Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 118(3) — 2 cases

Matter of Last Train Stop, Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 2018 NY Slip Op 3364 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018). “DECISION & JUDGMENT Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review so much of a determination of the New York State Liquor Authority dated November 9, 2015, as adopted the recommendation of an administrative law judge dated July 13, 2015, made after a hearing, sustaining two…”

Matter of Last Train Stop, Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 2018 NY Slip Op 3365 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.