Crispino v. Byrne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Crispino v. Byrne

32 A.D.2d 784, 302 N.Y.S.2d 979, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3834

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

DecidedJune 4, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 32 A.D.2d 784 (Crispino v. Byrne) 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

Crispino v. Byrne, 32 A.D.2d 784, 302 N.Y.S.2d 979, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3834 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to declare null and void the petition designating respondent Byrne a candidate of the Republican Party for the public office of Councilman-at-Large for the Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York, in the Primary Election to be held on June 17, 1969, petitioners herein appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered June 4, 1969, which dismissed the proceeding. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and proceeding remanded to the Special Term for a new hearing and determination. In our opinion, under the circumstances of this case, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to have dismissed the proceeding. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to declare null and void the petition designating respondent Byrne a candidate of the Republican Party for the public office of Councilman-at-Large for the Borough of Brooklyn, City of New York, in the Primary Election to be held on June 17, 1969, petitioners herein appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered June 4, 1969, which dismissed the proceeding. Order reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and proceeding remanded to the Special Term for a new hearing and determination. In our opinion, under the circumstances of this case, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to have dismissed the proceeding. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 A.D.2d 784, 302 N.Y.S.2d 979, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crispino-v-byrne-nyappdiv-1969.