Cronk v. Ferencsik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cronk v. Ferencsik

181 A.D.2d 754, 581 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3803

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

DecidedMarch 12, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 181 A.D.2d 754 (Cronk v. Ferencsik) 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

Cronk v. Ferencsik, 181 A.D.2d 754, 581 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3803 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding to invalidate a petition nominating Chris Ferencsik, Garry Biggs and John Vaughan as candidates for the public offices of Mayor, Trustee and Trustee, respectively, of the Village of Lindenhurst, in the general village election of the Village of Lindenhurst to be held on March 17, 1992, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), dated March 5, 1992, which granted the application.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

”[T]he requirement of Election Law § 6-132 that the subscribing witness make a signed statement as to the total number of signatures on the petition sheet to which [the statement] is appended is '[essential to the integrity of the petition process’ ” (Matter of Harfmann v Sachs, 138 AD2d 550, quoting Matter of Jonas v Velez, 65 NY2d 954, 955). Election Law § 15-108, which provides for the nomination of candidates for elective village offices, contains a provision almost identical to that provision of Election Law § 6-132. The requirement that the witness’s signed statement include the number of signatures on the petition sheet was clearly not satisfied in this case. Therefore, the court properly invalidated the petition. Sullivan, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber and Pizzuto, 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 nominating Chris Ferencsik, Garry Biggs and John Vaughan as candidates for the public offices of Mayor, Trustee and Trustee, respectively, of the Village of Lindenhurst, in the general village election of the Village of Lindenhurst to be held on March 17, 1992, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), dated March 5, 1992, which granted the application.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

”[T]he requirement of Election Law § 6-132 that the subscribing witness make a signed statement as to the total number of signatures on the petition sheet to which [the statement] is appended is '[essential to the integrity of the petition process’ ” (Matter of Harfmann v Sachs, 138 AD2d 550, quoting Matter of Jonas v Velez, 65 NY2d 954, 955). Election Law § 15-108, which provides for the nomination of candidates for elective village offices, contains a provision almost identical to that provision of Election Law § 6-132. The requirement that the witness’s signed statement include the number of signatures on the petition sheet was clearly not satisfied in this case. Therefore, the court properly invalidated the petition. Sullivan, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 A.D.2d 754, 581 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3803, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cronk-v-ferencsik-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack