Cohen v. Birnbaum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cohen v. Birnbaum

104 A.D.2d 471, 479 N.Y.S.2d 158, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19924

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedAugust 23, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 104 A.D.2d 471 (Cohen v. Birnbaum) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cohen v. Birnbaum, 104 A.D.2d 471, 479 N.Y.S.2d 158, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19924 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— In proceedings to invalidate petitions designating certain respondents as candidates in the Liberal Party primary election to be held on September 11,1984, for the party position of Members of the State Committee in the 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st and 22nd Assembly Districts, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Vitale, J.), dated August 17,1984, which dismissed the proceedings for lack of jurisdiction.

Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

This appeal presents mixed questions of law and fact. Although a hearing at which testimony was taken and during which certain stipulations were entered into was conducted before Special Term, no transcript of the hearing was submitted. Under the circumstances here present, this court does not have a sufficient basis to review Special Term’s determination and the appeal must be dismissed (see Matter of Hutchinson v McNab, 96 AD2d 919). Brown, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

— In proceedings to invalidate petitions designating certain respondents as candidates in the Liberal Party primary election to be held on September 11,1984, for the party position of Members of the State Committee in the 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st and 22nd Assembly Districts, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Vitale, J.), dated August 17,1984, which dismissed the proceedings for lack of jurisdiction.

Appeal dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

This appeal presents mixed questions of law and fact. Although a hearing at which testimony was taken and during which certain stipulations were entered into was conducted before Special Term, no transcript of the hearing was submitted. Under the circumstances here present, this court does not have a sufficient basis to review Special Term’s determination and the appeal must be dismissed (see Matter of Hutchinson v McNab, 96 AD2d 919). Brown, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 471, 479 N.Y.S.2d 158, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19924, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-birnbaum-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack