Baranello v. Smith

New York Court of Appeals

Baranello v. Smith

264 N.E.2d 355, 27 N.Y.2d 807, 315 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1970 N.Y. LEXIS 1045

DecidedOctober 14, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 264 N.E.2d 355 (Baranello v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Baranello v. Smith, 264 N.E.2d 355, 27 N.Y.2d 807, 315 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1970 N.Y. LEXIS 1045 (N.Y. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, without costs; no opinion.

Concur: Judges Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson. Chief Judge Fuld concurs on the ground that the question of the likelihood of confusion in thé minds of those who signed the nominating petitions containing the “ buckley” emblem was not raised below. Judge Burke dissents and votes to modify and grant the petition in all respects in the following memorandum : The standards established for the first time in Matter [809]*809of Weisberg v. Lomenzo (27 N Y 2d 757) and Matter of Ottinger v. Lomenzo (27 N Y 2d 754) dictate the conclusion that the emblem set forth in -the nominating petitions was improper, as it could be the cause of confusion in the minds of the signers of the independent nominating petitions and thereby induce them to sign under the belief that Buckley was supporting these nominees exclusively. Therefore, the nominating petitions should have been invalidated.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order affirmed, without costs; no opinion.

Concur: Judges Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson. Chief Judge Fuld concurs on the ground that the question of the likelihood of confusion in thé minds of those who signed the nominating petitions containing the “ buckley” emblem was not raised below. Judge Burke dissents and votes to modify and grant the petition in all respects in the following memorandum : The standards established for the first time in Matter [809]*809of Weisberg v. Lomenzo (27 N Y 2d 757) and Matter of Ottinger v. Lomenzo (27 N Y 2d 754) dictate the conclusion that the emblem set forth in -the nominating petitions was improper, as it could be the cause of confusion in the minds of the signers of the independent nominating petitions and thereby induce them to sign under the belief that Buckley was supporting these nominees exclusively. Therefore, the nominating petitions should have been invalidated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 N.E.2d 355, 27 N.Y.2d 807, 315 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1970 N.Y. LEXIS 1045, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baranello-v-smith-ny-1970.