In the Matter of Anthony P. Nunziato v. Messano
| Decision Date | 16 August 2011 |
| Citation | 928 N.Y.S.2d 585,2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 06273,87 A.D.3d 647 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Anthony P. NUNZIATO, et al., appellants,v.Frank P. MESSANO, et al., respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
In a proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16–102 to invalidate a petition designating Frank P. Messano and Rosemarie Iacovone as candidates in a primary election to be held on September 13, 2011, for the Republican Party positions of Male Member and Female Member of the Republican Party State Committee from the 30th Assembly District, respectively, the petitioners appeal from a final order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (O'Donoghue, J.), dated August 8, 2011, which, upon granting the application of Frank P. Messano and Rosemarie Iacovone to dismiss the petition to invalidate on the ground that service thereof was jurisdictionally defective, inter alia, dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the final order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition to invalidate is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith, to be conducted forthwith.
In a proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16–102, “[t]he method of service provided for in an order to show cause is jurisdictional in nature and must be strictly complied with” ( Matter of Hennessey v. DiCarlo, 21 A.D.3d 505, 505, 800 N.Y.S.2d 576; see Matter of Del Villar v. Vekiarelis, 59 A.D.3d 642, 872 N.Y.S.2d 921; Matter of Master v. Pohanka, 43 A.D.3d 478, 844 N.Y.S.2d 311). Here, the petitioners established that they served the petition to invalidate in accordance with the order to show cause, which permitted service, among other means, “by guaranteed express overnight delivery mail,” placed in the mail on or before July 27, 2011. The petitioners submitted an affirmation of service indicating that copies of the petition to invalidate were dispatched by guaranteed express overnight delivery, and annexing the original receipts of mailing, addressed to each of the respondents, which reflected the use of guaranteed express overnight delivery mail and were date-stamped by the United States Postal Service on July 27, 2011. In support of their application to dismiss the petition to invalidate, the respondent candidates offered no evidence to contradict the petitioners' proof that the petition to invalidate was served in a manner authorized by the order to show cause.
With respect to the issue of whether service was completed within the period set forth in Election Law § 16–102(2), “[a] proceeding with respect to a petition shall be instituted within fourteen days after the last day to file the petition, or within three business days after the officer or board with whom or which such petition was filed, makes a determination of invalidity with respect to such petition, whichever is later” (Election Law § 16–102 [2] ). “A petitioner raising a challenge under Election Law § 16–102 must commence the proceeding and complete service on all the necessary parties within the period...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Corrigan v. Suffolk Cnty. Bd. of Elections
...2022 to commence a proceeding, in order to challenge that administrative determination. As stated by the Court in Nunziato v. Messano , 87 A.D.3d 647, 648, 928 N.Y.S.2d 585 (2d Dept. 2011), the commencing of the action includes serving all necessary parties. As the moving papers demonstrate......
-
Jacobi v. Murray
...provided for in an Order to Show Cause is jurisdictional in nature and must be strictly complied with." Matter of Nunziato v. Messano, 87 A.D.3d 647, 647, 928 N.Y.S.2d 585 (2d Dept.2011) [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of Rue v. Hill, 287 A.D.2d 781, 782, 731 N.......
-
Rotanelli v. Westchester Cnty. Bd. of Elections
...things, that the mailings were “date-stamped by the United States Postal Service on August 4, 2011”]; Matter of Nunziato v. Messano, 87 A.D.3d 647, 928 N.Y.S.2d 585 [2d Dept. 2011] ). Notably, the petitioners' only evidence that such mail would be designated for overnight delivery was from ......
-
Corrigan v. Suffolk Cnty. Bd. of Elections
...2022 to commence a proceeding, in order to challenge that administrative determination. As stated by the Court in Nunziato v. Messano, 87 A.D.3d 647, 648, 928 N.Y.S.2d 585 (2d Dept 2011), the commencing of the action includes serving all necessary parties. As the moving papers demonstrate, ......