Tenneriello v. Board of Elections of City of New York
| Decision Date | 22 August 1984 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Steven C. TENNERIELLO, et al., Appellants, v. The BOARD OF ELECTIONS OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent; Lawrence Knipel, et al., Respondents-Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Before BRACKEN, J.P., and O'CONNOR, BROWN, BOYERS and EIBER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a proceeding to validate a petition designating petitioners as candidates in the Democratic Party primary election to be held on September 11, 1984, for the party positions of members of the County Committee for the Democratic Party of Kings County from various election districts of the 44th Assembly District, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated August 14, 1984, which granted a motion to dismiss the proceeding.
Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, motion to dismiss denied, and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.
Petitioners instituted the within proceeding pursuant to article 16 of the Election Law seeking to validate their candidacies for election as members of the County Committee for the Democratic Party of Kings County from various election districts in the 44th Assembly District. The petition served herein is verified by petitioners' attorney pursuant to CPLR 3020 (subd. par. 3). Special Term, relying upon the Appellate Division, Fourth Department's decision in Matter of Sedita v. Smolinski, 89 A.D.2d 1052, 454 N.Y.S.2d 914, determined, inter alia, that verification by an attorney rather than a party to the proceeding does not comply with section 16-116 of the Election Law and accordingly dismissed the proceeding. We disagree.
Section 16-116 of the Election Law provides, inter alia, that a proceeding brought pursuant to that article "shall be heard upon a verified petition and such oral or written proof as may be offered". Nothing in this section requires a holding that verification of a petition may not be based upon an attorney's verification pursuant to CPLR 3020 (subd. par. 3). In fact, the equities in an election proceeding weigh heavily in favor of allowing such a verification because these proceedings are subject to severe time constraints and require immediate action. Accordingly, we respectfully disagree with the conclusion reached in Matter of Sedita v. Smolinski (supra) and hold that a petition commencing a proceeding...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jacobi v. Murray
...the pleadings, and therefore, the Court will address the issue on the merits. As noted by the Court in Tenneriello v. Board of Elections, 104 A.D.2d 467, 468, 479 N.Y.S.2d 72 (2d Dept.1984), "verification by petitioners' attorney is permitted as he had an office in a county other than the o......
-
Visconti v. Paino
...954, 150 N.Y.S.2d 323; Matter of Tenneriello v. Board of Elections, 125 Misc.2d 190, 479 N.Y.S.2d 328, revd. on other grounds 104 A.D.2d 467, 479 N.Y.S.2d 72; compare, Matter of Tamney v. Atkins, 151 A.D. 309, 136 N.Y.S. 865, revd. on other grounds 209 N.Y. 202, 102 N.E. 567). It is unconte......
-
Voglewede v. Stepherson
...subject to severe time constraints, and they require immediate action (see Matter of Tenneriello v. Board of Elections in City of N.Y., 104 A.D.2d 467, 468, 479 N.Y.S.2d 72)" (Master v. Pohanka, 44 A.3d 1050,1052 [2nd Dept. 2007J) ordered the parties to appear for a hearing on May 3, 2023.[......
-
Rodriguez v. Westchester Cnty. Bd. of Elections
...be heard upon a verified petition and such oral or written proof as may be offered (Tenneriello v. Bd. of Elections of City of New York, 104 A.D.2d 467, 479 N.Y.S.2d 72 [2d Dept.1984], aff'd, 63 N.Y.2d 700, 479 N.Y.S.2d 978, 468 N.E.2d 1115 [1984] ). This requirement of a verified petition ......