Feldman v. Gold

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Feldman v. Gold

196 A.D.2d 611, 601 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8151

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 18, 1993·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding to invalidate a petition designating Lila Gold as a candidate in a primary election to be held on September 14, 1993, for the nomination of the Democratic Party as its candidate for the public office of Judge of the Civil Court of the City of New York for Kings County, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.), dated August 16, 1993, which dismissed the proceeding.

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

Contrary to the petitioners’ assertions on appeal, the Supreme Court correctly held that the information concerning the subscribing witnesses on the challenged pages of the respondents’ designating petitions substantially complied with the requirements of the Election Law (see, Election Law §§ 6-130, 6-132; see, Matter of Regan v Starkweather, 186 AD2d 980; Matter of Wilson v McClean, 175 AD2d 935, lv denied 78 NY2d 857). Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller, Ritter and Copertino, 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 designating Lila Gold as a candidate in a primary election to be held on September 14, 1993, for the nomination of the Democratic Party as its candidate for the public office of Judge of the Civil Court of the City of New York for Kings County, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.), dated August 16, 1993, which dismissed the proceeding.

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

Contrary to the petitioners’ assertions on appeal, the Supreme Court correctly held that the information concerning the subscribing witnesses on the challenged pages of the respondents’ designating petitions substantially complied with the requirements of the Election Law (see, Election Law §§ 6-130, 6-132; see, Matter of Regan v Starkweather, 186 AD2d 980; Matter of Wilson v McClean, 175 AD2d 935, lv denied 78 NY2d 857). Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.

Feldman v. Gold, 196 A.D.2d 611, 601 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8151 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

196 A.D.2d 611 (Feldman v. Gold) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related