New York Personal Injury Lawyer Blog 24/7
The petitioner for this case is Lena Bagels, Inc. The respondent of the case is The City of New York and the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs. The case is being heard in the New York Supreme Court. The judge overseeing the case is Philip G. Minardo.
Case
Lena Bagels operates a corporation and the main place where business occurs is located on Richmond Avenue in Staten Island, New York. The company is authorized by the state to transact business. Lena Bagels was incorporated in 2001. A New York Injury Lawyer said the petitioner, Lena Bagels has been found guilty of selling tobacco products to a minor. The petitioner states that the fine of $3500 is void and requests the renewal of their application for their tobacco license. The petitioner is seeking to annul the recommendation made by Judge Mitchell B. Nisonoff.
Case History
The previous court that heard this particular case recommended that the petitioner be fined $3500 and assigned a point to their tobacco products registration card. The petitioner already had two points on their card and now has three points. For this reason the license to sell tobacco products was suspended for six months. This suspension included the sale of lottery tickets.
When this action occurred Lena Bagels held a valid registration for the sale of cigarettes and tobacco. At the initial case, Hany Nasralla, who is an inspector for the Department of Consumer Affairs in New York City, stated that Suzanne Ford, an employee of Lena Bagels, sold cigarettes to a person who was a minor. No ID was requested from the individual who purchased the cigarettes.
Petitioner Argument
The petitioner states that the particular transaction between Suzanne Ford and the minor is questionable as they believe the company was tricked into selling tobacco to a minor who was undercover. A Suffolk County Personal Injury Lawyer said the petitioner also states that Ford had been trained and had taken a class through the New York State Department of Health as required for the certificate in sales training for tobacco.
Ford testified that she sold Parliament Lights to a person who stated he was over 18. She admits that she did not ask for ID because the individual appeared to be over the age of 27 as he was tall, with a full beard, and a very deep voice.
The petitioner states that the individual was told by the Department of Consumer Affairs to misrepresent how old he was. The defense for the petitioner is based on the appearance of the minor as well as his misrepresentation of his age. Additionally, the birth certificate was not introduced into evidence for the case.
Two witnesses who were in the store at the time of the transaction both state that the individual in question seemed to be over the age of 25.
Respondents Argument
The respondents state that the petitioner was in violation of the Public Health Law 1399 and the New York City Administrative Code 17-620. A Staten Island Personal Injury Lawyer said the respondents state that the determination in the case was reasonable, rational, and lawful in all respects and should be upheld.
Court Decision
The Court finds that the previous judgment in regard to the suspension and fine were not capricious or arbitrary and were imposed within the framework of the law. The issue involving substantial evidence will be transferred to the Appellate Division for further review.
For those in need of legal assistance, contact the offices of Stephen Bilkis & Associates. Whether you have been a victim of medical malpractice, premises liability or a trip and fall, our team of lawyers can help you through any type of legal matter. You may contact one of our New York City offices at any time to set up a free consultation.