Duffy v. Hayduk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Duffy v. Hayduk

41 A.D.2d 944, 343 N.Y.S.2d 550, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4480

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

DecidedMay 15, 1973

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 41 A.D.2d 944 (Duffy v. Hayduk) 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

Duffy v. Hayduk, 41 A.D.2d 944, 343 N.Y.S.2d 550, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4480 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to validate petitions designating petitioner as a candidate in the Democratic Party Primary Election to be held on June 4,1973 for nomination for the public office of County Legislator for District 7, Westchester County, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered May 2, 1973, which sustained the petition in this proceeding and directed that petitioner’s name be restored to the ballot. Judgment affirmed, without costs. Upon the argument it was conceded that the subscribing witnesses in both years resided at the same address. Under the circumstances, we find that the failure to set forth the residence in the prior year was not fatal, when considering that the election and assembly districts for such prior year were correctly stated. Matter of Dorsey v. Cohen (268 N. Y. 620) is not in point. Rabin, P. J., Martuseello, Shapiro, Gulotta and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to validate petitions designating petitioner as a candidate in the Democratic Party Primary Election to be held on June 4,1973 for nomination for the public office of County Legislator for District 7, Westchester County, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered May 2, 1973, which sustained the petition in this proceeding and directed that petitioner’s name be restored to the ballot. Judgment affirmed, without costs. Upon the argument it was conceded that the subscribing witnesses in both years resided at the same address. Under the circumstances, we find that the failure to set forth the residence in the prior year was not fatal, when considering that the election and assembly districts for such prior year were correctly stated. Matter of Dorsey v. Cohen (268 N. Y. 620) is not in point. Rabin, P. J., Martuseello, Shapiro, Gulotta and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.2d 944, 343 N.Y.S.2d 550, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4480, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duffy-v-hayduk-nyappdiv-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack