Calvi v. McLaughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Calvi v. McLaughlin

264 A.D.2d 453, 694 N.Y.S.2d 444, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8764

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 18, 1999·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding to invalidate a petition designating the individual respondents as candidates in a primary election to be held on September 14, 1999, for both the Republican and Conservative Party nominations for the public office of Council Member, Fourth Council District, City of Yonkers, the petitioner Carlo Calvi appeals from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Fredman, J.), entered August 13, 1999, as denied his petition to invalidate the respondent Liam J. McLaughlin’s designating petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner failed to meet his burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that the designating petition of the respondent Liam McLaughlin was permeated with fraud and should be invalidated (see, Matter of Buchanan v Espada, 88 NY2d 973, 975; Matter of Proskin v May, 40 NY2d 829, 830; Matter of Thomas v Simon, 89 AD2d 952, affd 57 NY2d 744). O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Joy, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to invalidate a petition designating the individual respondents as candidates in a primary election to be held on September 14, 1999, for both the Republican and Conservative Party nominations for the public office of Council Member, Fourth Council District, City of Yonkers, the petitioner Carlo Calvi appeals from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Fredman, J.), entered August 13, 1999, as denied his petition to invalidate the respondent Liam J. McLaughlin’s designating petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner failed to meet his burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that the designating petition of the respondent Liam McLaughlin was permeated with fraud and should be invalidated (see, Matter of Buchanan v Espada, 88 NY2d 973, 975; Matter of Proskin v May, 40 NY2d 829, 830; Matter of Thomas v Simon, 89 AD2d 952, affd 57 NY2d 744). O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Joy, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Calvi v. McLaughlin, 264 A.D.2d 453, 694 N.Y.S.2d 444, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8764 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

264 A.D.2d 453 (Calvi v. McLaughlin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related