Franklin v. Mandeville

Decision Date14 January 1970
Parties, 256 N.E.2d 534 Lawrence FRANKLIN et al., Respondents, v. Elbert MANDEVILLE, as Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Nassau, et al., Appellants, and Michael N. Petito et al., Respondents.
CourtNew York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

George C. Pratt, Mineola, and Harold E. Collins, Levittown, for appellants.

Seymour H. Kligler and Michael L. Goldstein, New York City, for plaintiffs-respondents.

Morris H. Schneider, County Atty. (A. Thomas Levin and John M. Armentano, Mineola, of counsel), for defendants-respondents.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. (Daniel M. Cohen, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, New York City, of counsel), in his statutory capacity under Section 71 of the Executive Law.

GIBSON, Judge.

The plaintiffs in this reapportionment case attack the present weighted voting plan under which the Board of Supervisors of Nassau County has long operated. 1 Upon motion, Special Term awarded summary judgment declaring the plan 'illegal, invalid and inconsistent with the equal protection clauses of the State and Federal Constitutions' and directing that, within six months, the appropriate defendants 'adopt local laws containing plans for apportionment of the Nassau County Board of Supervisors which are legal, valid and consistent with the equal protection clauses'. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed, finding 'inescapable' its conclusion that the residents of the Town of Hempstead were unconstitutionally deprived of their right to substantial equality of representation.

Concededly, the Town of Hempstead's population constituted 57.12% Of the county's population but that town's representatives may cast but 49.6% Of the board's vote. Important as is the fact of the present inequality, it is of even greater moment that inequality in some degree is mandated and, indeed, perpetuated by the charter provision: 'nor shall the supervisor or supervisors of any town or city be entitled to cast more than fifty per centum of the total vote of said board.' (L.1936, ch. 879, § 104, subd. 2.) This provision has survived two attempts at reapportionment, proposals therefor having been defeated in referendums conducted in 1965 and 1967 2; and clearly violates the one man, one vote principle. The phenomenal population growth in Hempstead, as in Nassau County generally, points up the inequality created and perpetuated by the charter provision. Not only are the Hempstead Supervisors presently barred from exercise of a majority vote, but section 104 would continue to deprive them, or the residents of any other town or city subsequently containing a majority of the county population, from majority representation, regardless of how great their majority may presently be or may in future become. This is the vital factor which...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • League of Women Voters of Nassau County v. Nassau County Bd. of Sup'rs
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • May 22, 1984
    ...1917, the Board has used a weighted voting system, 2 which has been the subject of other litigation. In Franklin v. Mandeville, 26 N.Y.2d 65, 308 N.Y.S.2d 375, 256 N.E.2d 534 (1970), a case early in reapportionment jurisprudence, the Board's weighted voting plan was also attacked as unconst......
  • Jackson v. NASSAU COUNTY BD. OF SUP'RS.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • April 14, 1993
    ...1970, rather than the 1960, federal census concerning the number of inhabitants in Nassau County (Franklin v. Mandeville, 26 N.Y.2d 65, 69-70, 308 N.Y.S.2d 375, 377, 256 N.E.2d 534, 535 1970). In referring to Section 104, the Court of Appeals observed that "inequality in some degree is mand......
  • Franklin v. Krause
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • November 16, 1972
    ... ... Mandeville et al., 57 Misc.2d 1072, 294 N.Y.S.2d 141; affd. 32 A.D.2d 549, 299 N.Y.S.2d 953; mod. 26 N.Y.2d 65, 308 N.Y.S.2d 375, 256 N.E.2d 534 (1970); mot. to clarification, etc., denied 28 N.Y.2d 988, 323 N.Y.S.2d 841, 272 N.E.2d 340 (1971)). The Court of Appeals also ordered defendant-Board to adopt a ... ...
  • Morrison v. Board of Sup'rs of Oswego County
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • March 7, 1970
    ...The use of the 1970 census figures has been indicated and referred to with approval in Franklin v. Board of Supervisors of Nassau County (Mandeville), 26 N.Y.2d 65, 308 N.Y.S.2d 375, 256 N.E.2d 535, decided January 14, 1970, by the Court of Appeals. See Honing et al. v. Bd. of Supervisors o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT