Carroll v. Cohen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Carroll v. Cohen

262 A.D. 481, 30 N.Y.S.2d 555, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5400

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 29, 1941·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The petitions herein were sufficient. They contained a statement that the signers were duly qualified voters who had registered to vote in the borough of Manhattan, city of New York, within eighteen months previous to the filing of the petition. In this respect the petitions differed from those considered in Matter of Goldberg v. Cohen (257 App. Div. 675; affd., 281 N. Y. 776). As we indicated in the case cited, there is no express requirement in the statute that the address of registration be given.

The order appealed from should be reversed and the motion denied.

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion denied.

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

Per Curiam.

The petitions herein were sufficient. They contained a statement that the signers were duly qualified voters who had registered to vote in the borough of Manhattan, city of New York, within eighteen months previous to the filing of the petition. In this respect the petitions differed from those considered in Matter of Goldberg v. Cohen (257 App. Div. 675; affd., 281 N. Y. 776). As we indicated in the case cited, there is no express requirement in the statute that the address of registration be given.

The order appealed from should be reversed and the motion denied.

Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion denied.

Carroll v. Cohen, 262 A.D. 481, 30 N.Y.S.2d 555, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5400 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

262 A.D. 481 (Carroll v. Cohen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related