Liepshutz v. Palmateer
| Decision Date | 28 August 1985 |
| Parties | , 483 N.E.2d 1153 In the Matter of Gerald H. LIEPSHUTZ, Respondent-Appellant, v. Lawrence PALMATEER, Jr., et al., Constituting the Greene County Board of Elections, Respondents, and Daniel K. Lalor, Appellant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.
The Appellate Division correctly found that the failure of several witnesses to include their proper residence addresses and the town or city in which they reside (Election Law § 6-132[2] ), the inclusion by several individual signers of improper residence addresses, towns, election districts and wards (Election Law § 6-130), and the uncontroverted evidence that additions were made to witness statements after they were signed and not in the witnesses' presence (see, Matter of Jonas v. Velez, 65 N.Y.2d 954, 493 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 483 N.E.2d 1151 [decided herewith]; Matter of Sheldon v. Sperber, 45 N.Y.2d 788, 409 N.Y.S.2d 1, 381 N.E.2d 159) requires that 253 of the designating petition's 528 signatures be stricken, leaving an insufficient number of signatures to validate the petition. Thus, we need not reach the issue of the sufficiency of the description of the public office being sought by respondent or the assertions that fraud and irregularity permeated the petition-gathering process.
On appeal by respondent Lalor, order affirmed, without costs. Cross appeal by petitioner dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that the cross appellant is not a party aggrieved (CPLR 5511).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vansavage v. Jones
...290, 519 N.Y.S.2d 74 [1987]; Matter of Liepshutz v. Palmateer, 112 A.D.2d 1101, 1103, 493 N.Y.S.2d 234 [1985], affd.65 N.Y.2d 965, 493 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 483 N.E.2d 1153 [1985] ). Both VanSavage and Jones further contend that there were additional signatures on Jones' designating petition that ......
-
Canary v. N.Y. State Bd. of Elections
...correct residence address appear on the face of the designating petition (see Election Law § 6–130 ; Matter of Liepshutz v. Palmateer, 65 N.Y.2d 965, 966–967, 493 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 483 N.E.2d 1153 [1985] ; Matter of Tischler v. Hikind, 98 A.D.3d at 927, 951 N.Y.S.2d 529 ). Based upon the foreg......
-
Maguire v. Bennett
...district in a town to determine whether a voter is properly registered. Hall v. Heffernan, supra; Liepshutz v. Palmateer, 65 N.Y.2d 965, 493 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 483 N.E.2d 1153 (1985). In the case before the bar, however, the presence of the two signatures was patent, appearing on the face of th......
-
In the Matter of Catherine E. Pisani v. Kane
...at 914–915, 733 N.Y.S.2d 133, 758 N.E.2d 1110, citing Lerman v. Board of Elections, 232 F.3d at 150; Matter of Liepshutz v. Palmateer, 65 N.Y.2d 965, 966–967, 493 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 483 N.E.2d 1153; Matter of Dalton v. Wayne County Bd. of Elections, 65 A.D.3d 817, 883 N.Y.S.2d 841; Matter of He......