Dayton v. Board of Elections

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dayton v. Board of Elections

40 A.D.2d 616, 335 N.Y.S.2d 821, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3924

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

DecidedSeptember 15, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 40 A.D.2d 616 (Dayton v. Board of Elections) 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

Dayton v. Board of Elections, 40 A.D.2d 616, 335 N.Y.S.2d 821, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3924 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered September 5, 1972 in Albany County, in a proceeding under section 330 of the Election Law which ordered that Martha T. Dayton be declared the winning candidate in the Primary Election for the office of candidate of the Democratic Party for Member of Assembly, 105th District, for the State of New York. On this record it is impossible to conclusively determine which candidate received the greater number of votes. Consequently, we are constrained to direct a new election. (See Election Law, § 330, subd. 2.) Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and new election directed to be held on or before September 26, 1972. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Kane and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered September 5, 1972 in Albany County, in a proceeding under section 330 of the Election Law which ordered that Martha T. Dayton be declared the winning candidate in the Primary Election for the office of candidate of the Democratic Party for Member of Assembly, 105th District, for the State of New York. On this record it is impossible to conclusively determine which candidate received the greater number of votes. Consequently, we are constrained to direct a new election. (See Election Law, § 330, subd. 2.) Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and new election directed to be held on or before September 26, 1972. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Kane and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.2d 616, 335 N.Y.S.2d 821, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3924, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dayton-v-board-of-elections-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack