In the Matter of Maloney v. Ulster County Board of Elections, 98612.
| Decision Date | 18 August 2005 |
| Docket Number | 98612. |
| Citation | 21 A.D.3d 692,800 N.Y.S.2d 249,2005 NY Slip Op 06470 |
| Parties | In the Matter of JAMES MALONEY, Respondent, v. ULSTER COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS et al., Respondents, and MICHAEL G. BERARDI, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (McCarthy, J.), entered August 5, 2005 in Ulster County, which partially granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16-102, and declared invalid that portion of a designating petition naming respondent Michael G. Berardi as the Independence Party candidate for the office of Ulster County Legislator for the 5th Legislative District in the September 13, 2005 primary election.
Respondent Michael G. Berardi (hereinafter respondent) and respondent Brian Cahill filed a joint designating petition with respondent Ulster County Board of Elections designating them as Independence Party candidates for the office of Ulster County Legislator for the 5th Legislative District in the September 13, 2005 primary election. Thereafter, petitioner filed objections to the designating petition and commenced this proceeding challenging its validity on the basis that respondent's place of residence was not correctly stated. Following a hearing, at which respondent acknowledged that the residence listed on the petition was his previous residence, Supreme Court declared the petition invalid with respect to respondent only. This appeal by respondent ensued.
Election Law § 6-132 (1) requires that the candidate's place of residence appear on the designating petition (see Matter of Brigandi v. Barasch, 144 AD2d 177, 178 [1988], lv denied 72 NY2d 810 [1988]). While this requirement serves to aid in the administrative processing of the petition, its "perhaps most important [function is] to assure that the signers of [the] petition are aware of the identity of their candidate" (Matter of Ferris v. Sadowski, 45 NY2d 815, 817 [1978]). Where a candidate's address is erroneously stated on the designating petition, but there is no showing of an intent by the candidate to mislead or confuse signatories as to his or her identity, nor a showing that the error would or did tend to mislead or confuse anyone, the designating petition should not be invalidated (see id.; Matter of Adams v. Power, 22 NY2d 783 [1968]; compare Matter of Eisenberg v. Strasser, 100 NY2d 590 [2003]; Matter of Finneran v. Hayduk, 45 NY2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In the Matter of Joan Pagones v. Irizarry
...Matter of Ferris v. Sadowski, 45 N.Y.2d 815, 817, 409 N.Y.S.2d 133, 381 N.E.2d 339; Matter of Maloney v. Ulster County Bd. of Elections, 21 A.D.3d 692, 693, 800 N.Y.S.2d 249; Matter of Petersen v. Board of Elections of City of N.Y., 218 A.D.2d 776, 630 N.Y.S.2d 580; Matter of Harfmann v. Sa......
-
Cohn v. Suffolk Cnty. Bd. of Elections
...N.Y.S.2d 133, 381 N.E.2d 339;see Matter of Shahzad v. Montesano, 98 A.D.3d 625, 949 N.Y.S.2d 655;Matter of Maloney v. Ulster County Bd. of Elections, 21 A.D.3d 692, 693, 800 N.Y.S.2d 249). Here, there has been no showing of any intention to mislead or confuse, and no showing that the inaccu......
-
Shahzad v. Montesano
...N.E.2d 339;see Matter of Pagones v. Irizarry,87 A.D.3d 648, 649, 928 N.Y.S.2d 467;Matter of Maloney v. Ulster County Bd. of Elections, 21 A.D.3d 692, 693, 800 N.Y.S.2d 249). Here, there was no evidence in the record of any intention to mislead or confuse. Indeed, the evidence showed, and th......
-
In the Matter of Parete v. Turco, 98591.
... ... TURCO et al., as Commissioners of the Ulster County Board of Elections, Respondents, and JOAN ... ...