According to Southold Town Police Chief Martin Flatley, an original court date set for last Thursday was adjourned due to a scheduling issue and the case will be heard on January 21.
Despite a recent decision to grant a temporary restraining order that allowed Vineyard 48 to conduct business after its liquor license was revoked, Southold Town Police Chief said recently that he feels confident the revocation will be upheld.
The Cutchogue winery has been thesource of heated contention over past months, with neighbors complaining about noise, parking issues, and "sex acts" in the vines.
According to Flatley, after the full board hearing of the New York State Liquor Authority on Dec. 17, during which Vineyard 48's liquor license was revoked, "Everybody was aware that they had the ability to appeal this decision. They took the route of going before a New York State Supreme Court justice to receive a temporary restraining order."
The judge, Flatley said, allowed the winery to conduct business including pruning grape vines, bottling wine and engaging in manufacturing activities, and conducting retail sales and wine tastings.
"However, the judge was very specific that they were not to have any parties at this location, with or without music, inside or outside," Flatley said.
Also, he added, an order to show cause was originally on the court calendar for last Thursday, during which time the Supreme Court justice was slated to hear further arguments in connection with the temporary restraining order. That case will be on the agenda on Jan. 21, he said.
"We still remain confident that the SLA’s license revocation at Vineyard 48 will be upheld at this level," Flatley said.
According to Southold Town Supervisor Scott Russell, the town had no legal role in the SLA's revocation of Vineyard 48's liquor license or the legal action brought against the winery by the SLA.
"We expect that operator to abide by all restrictions and limits imposed by the planning board in a recent application for site plan approval," Russell said. "Our next step is to wait for the legal process to move forward and, hopefully, bring the issue to a resolution."
Peter Sullivan, the Manhattan-based attorney for the winery, could not immediately be reached for comment.