In the Matter of John Rosenberg v. Bd. of Elections of the City of New York

• Decision Date: 31 October 1934
• Citation: 193 N.E. 340,265 N.Y. 604
• Parties: In the Matter of John ROSENBERG, Appellant, v. BOARD OF ELECTIONS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

265 N.Y. 604

193 N.E. 340

In the Matter of John ROSENBERG, Appellant,

v.BOARD OF ELECTIONS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Oct. 31, 1934.

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (242 App. Div. 804, 275 N. Y. S. 659), entered October 30, 1934, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion by petitioner for an order to compel the board of elections of the city of New York to place the name of petitioner on the ballot for the election to be held on November 6, 1934, as a candidate of the City Fusion Party for the office of Representative in Congress in the Thirteenth congressional district. On October 2, 1934, the petitioner filed 395 signatures with the board of elections designating him as a candidate for the office, and on October 9, 1934, he filed 1,325 additional signatures. The required number of valid signatures was 1,323. On October 5, 1934, objections were filed to the nominating petition, alleging, among other things, that a large percentage of names appearing upon the petition were false and forged, and that authentication by witnesses to the signatures was false and fraudulent. No objections were made to the signatures filed on October 9, 1934. On October 25, 1934, the board of elections held a hearing and ruled that the petition was invalid on the ground that it did not contain the required number of valid signatures.Edward M. Rose and John Rosenberg, both of New York City, for appellant.

Paul Windels, Corp. Counsel, of New York City (Russell L. Tarbox, of New York City, of counsel), for respondent Board of Elections.

Joseph P. Brennan, Jr., and Joseph S. Gershman, both of New York City, for respondent Christopher D. Sullivan.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed on the authority of Matter of Wicksel v. Cohen, 262 N. Y. 446, 187 N. E. 634.

POUND, C. J., and CRANE, LEHMAN, O'BRIEN, HUBBS, CROUCH, and LOUGHRAN, JJ., concur.