Bauman v. Fusco
| Decision Date | 10 February 1965 |
| Citation | 45 Misc.2d 326,256 N.Y.S.2d 855 |
| Parties | Application of Bert BAUMAN, Petitioner, Individually and as duly elected County Committeeman in the 62nd Election District of the 7th Assembly District of Bronx County and representing County Committeemen elected in the 41st-79th Election Districts of the 7th Assembly District, Bronx County, for an order enjoining the holding of a meeting of the combined County Committee of the 7th Assembly Districts East and West and declaring invalid a resolution of the Bronx County Democratic Executive Committee merging the 7th Assembly Executive Districts East and West, v. Louis FUSCO, Chairman of the Bronx Democratic County Committee, Henry McDonough, Secretary of the Bronx County Committee and Charles A. Buckley, Chairman of the Bronx County Executive Committee, Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
Sidney H. Rosen, New York City, for petitioner.
Eugene L. Sugarman and S. Philip Cohen, New York City, for respondents.
By applications numbered 5 (Goldsmith v. Fusco), 6 (Brooks v. Buckley) and 9 (Bauman v. Fusco) of the calendar of January 8, 1965, petitioners move to annul the action of the County Committee which, on June 18, 1964, elected respondents, Masciarelli and Gargiulo, as members of the Bronx County Executive Committee from the 12th Executive District and respondents, Campione and Catania, from the 7th Executive District. They further seek to annul any actions taken by such respondents and to enjoin them from further actions. Finally, an order is sought requiring a new election with respect to the members of the Executive Committee of the 12th Executive District West and the 7th Executive District East under the rules of the Democratic Party in effect on June 2, 1964. These applications are consolidated and will be disposed of together.
The facts are not in dispute. The reform forces of the Democratic Party in Bronx County concentrated their efforts for the election of county committeemen in the 12th Executive District West and the 7th Executive District East. They did not run slates of candidates in 12th East or the 7th West. Their county committeemen were committed to support executive members opposed to the incumbent regular Democratic Party executive committeemen from those districts, at the primary held on June 2, 1964. They were successful and elected a majority of the county committeemen in the districts in which they had concentrated. Thereupon, and after the primary, on June 8, 1964, the Executive Committee passed a resolution joining both east and west districts of the 7th Assembly District and the 12th Assembly District into single districts. Parenthetically, the 7th and 12th Assembly Districts were the only districts in Bronx County which had been divided into two executive districts. Every other executive district is co-terminous with an Assembly District.
Special Term, while critical of the procedure, believed that the Executive Committee acted within the sanction of the law (N.Y.L.J. June 18, 1964, p. 14, col. 6). On appeal such determination was reversed, and the resolution joining the districts was invalidated (Bauman v. Fusco, 21 A.D.2d 470, 251 N.Y.S.2d 166), that court holding that no rule of the old county committee could extend the authority of the executive committee after it became functus officio.
By subsequent order permission was granted to move at Special Term, on supplemental papers, and to join additional parties. Such are the proceedings now before the court. On the papers submitted it appears that on June 15, 1964, meetings of the County Committee of the joined districts were held at which the above named respondents were elected. Thereafter, on June 18, 1964, a meeting of the entire Bronx County Committee was held. That body, after organizing itself, passed new rules. The propriety of this meeting is not questioned by the petitioners, nor is the adoption of the rules. In fact, it is indicated that the petitioners participated in the proceedings and offered amendments to the rules which were defeated. These rules set up a procedure by which an Executive Committee was to be chosen. They also provided that the boundaries of the Assembly and Executive Districts shall be the same. Thereafter, a resolution was adopted allowing certain members to serve on the Executive Committee, among whom were the above named respondents in the 7th and 12th Districts. It is noted that at the meeting petitioners, Bauman and Brooks submitted amendments to the resolution to strike the names of the respondents from such positions and in the case of Bauman to substitute his name and one Renee Mandel. The amendments were defeated.
The first branch of the applications is granted, there being no objection. The persons sought to be added as parties respondent are joined in these proceedings.
With respect to the balance of the application, it is denied. The legislature has set up in Article 2 of the Election Law, the methods and procedures for the operation of political parties in this State. Section 10 of such Article provides for the creation of State and County Committees and such other Committees as the party rules provide. Section 12 mandates that the County Committee shall be elected from each election district. Section 13 provides that county committeemen shall be elected in primary elections and that when elected they shall hold office until the election of their successors. Section 14 allows other committees to be formed in the manner provided by the rules of the party. Section 15(1) provides that the County Committee shall meet and organize within twenty days after its election. Section 15(2) allows the County Committee to prepare rules to govern the party within the county. Section 15(3) is not considered in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baker v. Jensen
... ... five members thereafter to be elected by the County Committee), it is not 'a creature of the County Committee', as was the case in Matter of Bauman v. Fusco (45 Misc.2d 326, 328--329, 256 N.Y.S.2d 855, 858, affd. 23 A.D.2d 404, 261 N.Y.S.2d 85), where all members of the County Executive Committee ... ...
- Bengiat v. State
- Bauman v. Fusco
- People v. Guenther