Caruso v. Casciola

New York Court of Appeals

Caruso v. Casciola

261 N.E.2d 907, 27 N.Y.2d 657, 313 N.Y.S.2d 871, 1970 N.Y. LEXIS 1200

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 16, 1970

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 261 N.E.2d 907 (Caruso v. Casciola) 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

Caruso v. Casciola, 261 N.E.2d 907, 27 N.Y.2d 657, 313 N.Y.S.2d 871, 1970 N.Y. LEXIS 1200 (N.Y. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: Although it is true that several of the signatures herein were improperly validated by Special Term in that the notaries public or commissioners of deeds had not taken oaths of certain signatories (Election Law, § 135, subd. 2; see Matter of Helfand v. Meisser, 22 N Y 2d 762), the remaining valid signatures were far in excess of the amount required for designation. Moreover, although the technical irregularity of failing to administer the oath is sufficient to invalidate a signature, it is not the type of defect which would warrant invalidating the entire petition even though a sufficient number of valid signatures remained (Matter of Clum v. Holmes, 194 Misc. 863).

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson.

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

Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: Although it is true that several of the signatures herein were improperly validated by Special Term in that the notaries public or commissioners of deeds had not taken oaths of certain signatories (Election Law, § 135, subd. 2; see Matter of Helfand v. Meisser, 22 N Y 2d 762), the remaining valid signatures were far in excess of the amount required for designation. Moreover, although the technical irregularity of failing to administer the oath is sufficient to invalidate a signature, it is not the type of defect which would warrant invalidating the entire petition even though a sufficient number of valid signatures remained (Matter of Clum v. Holmes, 194 Misc. 863).

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 N.E.2d 907, 27 N.Y.2d 657, 313 N.Y.S.2d 871, 1970 N.Y. LEXIS 1200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/caruso-v-casciola-ny-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack