Leichter, Application of
| Decision Date | 14 December 1961 |
| Citation | 223 N.Y.S.2d 789,32 Misc.2d 234 |
| Parties | Application of Henry O. LEICHTER, Petitioner, for an order compelling Michael H. Prendergast, Respondent, as Chairman of the State Committee of the Democratic Party of the State of New York, to allow the Petitioner to Examine the Financial Books and Records of the said Committee, pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Act . |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
Begun Brothers, New York City, for petitioner (Benson H. Begun, New York City, of counsel).
James J. Leff, New York City, for respondent.
Petitioner, a member of the State Committee of the Democratic Party, seeks by means of this Article 78 proceeding to compel the Committee Chairman to give him access to and allow him to examine the financial books and records of the Committee. Respondent cross-moves to dismiss the petition on several grounds:
(1) The subject matter of the proceeding is of a political nature with respect to which the Court has not been given statutory authority to act and with respect to which it ought not to entertain jurisdiction.
(2) The matters of political judgment that the petitioner asks the Court to pass upon involve the internal affairs and policies of a political party which should be determined in the political arena and not by the courts.
(3) The petitioner has not brought himself within those classes of cases under which relief may be granted in a proceeding brought under Article 7, of the Civil Practice Act. No duty is specifically enjoined by law requiring the Chairman of the State Committee of any political party to make his financial records available for public inspection. No legally protected right of the petitioner is violated. No allegation is made that the Rules of the party authorize such an examination.
(4) The proceeding is not brought in good faith. It is brought in an attempt to use the court as a medium of an intra-party controversy.
It is petitioner's contention that access to the financial records must be afforded him in order to fulfill his duties to his constituents. Outside of a bare, unsupported suspicion the party funds might have been used for extra-party purposes, no actual allegation of wrongdoing appears in the petition, and it was admitted at the argument of this proceeding that petitioner has no knowledge of any wrongdoing or of any improper use of party funds.
Nevertheless, it was asserted on the argument that the 'exploration' was necessary in order to ascertain whether or not there had been any wrongdoing or any improper use of party funds, or, more specifically, to ascertain whether or not, as contended by petitioner, upon information and belief, in Paragraph 10 of his petition----
'* * *, that expenditures of funds collected by the said State Committee have been made or authorized by the Respondent for purposes other than the furtherance of the aims of the Democratic Party of the State of New york.'
If this were a proceeding by a stockholder of a stock corporation, by a member of a membership corporation or by a member of an unincorporated association, for examination of financial books, records and accounts based on the allegations of the within petition and statements made on the argument, it obviously would be characterized as a 'fishing excursion' and be disallowed. While it is obvious that the petitioner fails to present any basis for the Court's entertaining the proceedings, the Court nevertheless will pass on the question as to which petitioner seeks a determination, to wit, whether, as a matter of right, a single member of a 300-member political-party body is entitled to delve into its financial records.
Under our system of party government, it is clear that certain questions are of a political nature, which the courts, in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
National Ass'n of Greeting Card Publishers v. U.S. Postal Service
...that at the time in question he was not only a registered voter but also a state official of the Party. See also Application of Leichter, 32 Misc.2d 234, 223 N.Y.S.2d 789 (1961) (member of political party is bound by party rules).23 See note 22 supra. For example, in 1970 James Buckley won ......
-
Smith v. Pigeon
...own rules, manifests legislative intent that there shall be no judicial interference with party government [see, Application of Leichter, (1961) 32 Misc.2d 234, 223 N.Y.S.2d 789]. " 'Internal issues arising within political parties are best resolved within the party organization itself and ......
-
O'Neill v. Lerner
...in the absence of the violation of a controlling statute or the infringement of a clear legal right"); Application of Leichter, 32 Misc.2d 234, 223 N.Y.S.2d 789 (Sup.Ct. 1961). We share such reluctance. But we are here faced with the express statutory enjoinder that the expenses of a party ......
-
Bauman v. Fusco
...intention of noninterference with political party government by allowing parties to formulate their own rules (Matter of Leichter v. Prendergast, 32 Misc.2d 234, 223 N.Y.S.2d 789). It has also been held that the court is not concerned with the motives of a County Committee in adopting rules......