Donnelly v. McNab

• Decision Date: 28 August 1981
• Citation: 83 A.D.2d 896,442 N.Y.S.2d 532
• Parties: In the Matter of Martin A. DONNELLY et al., Petitioners-Respondents, v. Everett McNAB et al., Respondents; Anthony Viscuso et al., Appellants.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 532

442 N.Y.S.2d 532

83 A.D.2d 896

In the Matter of Martin A. DONNELLY et al., Petitioners-Respondents, v. Everett McNAB et al., Respondents Anthony Viscuso et al., Appellants.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division,

Second Department.

Aug. 28, 1981.

Neil J. Abelson, Port Jefferson, for appellants.

Steven M. Schapiro, Massapequa, for petitioners-respondents.

Before MOLLEN, P. J., and HOPKINS, O'CONNOR and WEINSTEIN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a proceeding to, inter alia, validate petitions designating the petitioners as candidates in the Republican Party Primary Election to be held on September 10, 1981, for the party position of County Committee Member from various election districts, Town of Babylon, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered August 20, 1981, which, inter alia, granted the application.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The identification of the party position sought omitted a geographic detail (the town name) that would have made the description more precise. However, given the information in the rest of the petition, it was sufficiently informative under section 6-132 of the Election Law so as to preclude any reasonable probability of confusing or deceiving the signers, voters or board of elections (see Matter of Denn v. Mahoney, 64 A.D.2d 1007, 409 N.Y.S.2d 285; Matter of Cook v. Zelazny, 49 A.D.2d 1036, 374 N.Y.S.2d 509; Matter of Murray v. Coveney, 39 A.D.2d 932, 333 N.Y.S.2d 125; Matter of Margolis v. Larkin, 39 A.D.2d 952, 333 N.Y.S.2d 288, affd. 30 N.Y.2d 876, 335 N.Y.S.2d 430, 286 N.E.2d 916; Matter of Caffery v. Lawley, 21 A.D.2d 749, 250 N.Y.S.2d 677, affd. 14 N.Y.2d 768, 250 N.Y.S.2d 805, 199 N.E.2d 839; Matter of Pearson v. Board of Elections of City of Syracuse, 284 App.Div. 649, 133 N.Y.S.2d 466; Matter of Carusone v. Varney, 277 App.Div. 326, 99 N.Y.S.2d 1, affd. sub nom. Matter of Barber v. Varney, 301 N.Y. 669, 94 N.E.2d 254; Matter of Praete v. Van Wart, 47 Misc.2d 898, 263 N.Y.S.2d 396; Matter of Duffy v. Board of Elections of County of Westchester, 40 Misc.2d 175, 242 N.Y.S.2d 644). There is no claim that the identification was inaccurate and that therefore, whether or not ambiguous for lack of specificity or precision in description, there was some impairment of the board of elections' ability to ascertain the candidate's qualifications and the indicated office's availability (see Matter of Kiley v. Coveney, 77 A.D.2d 941, 431 N.Y.S.2d 124, affd. 51 N.Y.2d 721, 431 N.Y.S.2d 1006, 410 N.E.2d 1233; Matter of Roland v. Toepfer, 64 A.D.2d 963, 408 N.Y.S.2d 537; Matter of Lane v. Meisser, 24...