Sheils v. Flynn
| Decision Date | 27 October 1937 |
| Citation | 11 N.E.2d 1,275 N.Y. 446 |
| Parties | SHEILS, v. FLYNN, Secretary of State, et al. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.
Action by William J. Sheils against Edward J. Flynn, Secretary of State, and others, wherein William Cronin, as Chairman of the Democratic County Committee of Westchester County, and another intervented. From a judgment of the Appellate Division (252 Ap.Div. 238, 300 N.Y.S. 536) affirming a judgment in favor of the defendants entered upon a decision of the court at trial at Special Term (164 Misc. 302, 299 N.Y.S. 64) dismissing the complaint, the named intervener appeals.
Affirmed.
Julius Weiss, Timothy A. McCarthy, and William O'Shea, Jr., all of New York City, for plaintiff-appellant.
Walter G.C. Otto, of New Rochelle, and Edward K. Kennedy, of New York City, for intervener-appellant.
William A. Davidson, of New York City, and Frank J. Claydon, both of White Plains, for respondent Board of Elections.
John J. Dillon, of New York City, and Walter W. Westall and Alfred M. Bailey, both of White Plains, for intervener-respondent.
Where the Board of Elections under sections 117 and 118 of the Election Law (Consol.Laws, c. 17) determines that the application and affidavit submitted therewith by a duly qualified voter is sufficient to permit him to vote as an absentee voter, the vote cannot be questioned in this action after election, where the vote has been received without objection or challenge, and the jurisdictional defects are not sufficient to change the result.
We do not approve by this decision the form of the affidavits submitted.
The judgment should be affirmed, without costs.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Amedore v. Peterson
...Ct., Albany County 1989];Sheils v. Flynn, 164 Misc. 302, 315–316, 299 N.Y.S. 64 [1937],affd.252 App.Div. 238, 300 N.Y.S. 536 [1937],affd.275 N.Y. 446, 11 N.E.2d 1 [1937] ). His objections to ballots G111 and U514 were not premised upon information that was statutorily required and, as such,......
-
Johnson v. Martins
...the Supreme Court properly concluded that the ballots designated as Exhibit 125 should be cast and canvassed ( see Sheils v. Flynn, 275 N.Y. 446, 452, 11 N.E.2d 1; Matter of Dorman v. Scaringe, 222 A.D.2d 887, 887-888, 635 N.Y.S.2d 725; see also Matter of Gross v. Albany County Bd. of Elect......
- State v. Malloy, C.A. CASE NO. 11CA0021
-
Smith v. Sullivan
...examination of the application. Sheils v. Flynn, 164 Misc. 302, 316, 299 N.Y.S. 64,affd.252 A.D. 238, 300 N.Y.S. 536 [3rd Dept.1937],affd.275 N.Y. 446, 11 N.E.2d 1 [1937]. Where applications are deemed to be defective, they are “of no force or effect. They d[o] not give the board of electio......