Foss v. McLean

1 Misc. 3d 783, 771 N.Y.S.2d 298, 2003 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1300
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 22, 2003
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Misc. 3d 783 (Foss v. McLean) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Foss v. McLean, 1 Misc. 3d 783, 771 N.Y.S.2d 298, 2003 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1300 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 2003).

Opinion

[784]*784OPINION OF THE COURT

George R. Peck, J.

Ordered that petitioner’s application for a judgment pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR, setting aside the election of Fire Commissioner for the Roosevelt Fire District, and the respondent’s motion for an order dismissing the within action are determined as follows:

In the majority of instances in New York State, for an individual to seek elective office, he or she must first circulate nominating petitions to registered voters in that political subdivision which encompasses that office so that the individual’s name can be placed on the ballot for the election.

In the instant matter, the petitioner, a resident within the Roosevelt Fire District and a duly registered voter who ran for the position of Fire Commissioner, alleges that the nominating petitions submitted by respondent Ronald McLean, the winner in that race, were defective, thus invalidating his victory. The election at issue was held on December 10, 2002, and the respondent Ronald McLean took office January 1, 2003.

The petitioner specifically alleges (1) that the Roosevelt Fire District did not comply with the requirements of Town Law § 175 in that no attempt was made to determine whether the nominating petitions of the respondent were valid, and (2) that the respondent was not a registered voter within the Roosevelt Fire District when he witnessed his nominating petitions.

The respondents move for an order dismissing the petition alleging first, the court lacks jurisdiction in that the action should have named the Secretary of the Roosevelt Fire District, and the officer in charge of the election as the proper party respondents; second, that the petitioner did not raise objections in a timely fashion to respondent Ronald McLean’s nominating petitions; and third, the present action is time-barred under the applicable statute of limitations.

Analysis

The question this court must determine first is one of first impression. Are the above-named respondents the proper parties against whom this action should be prosecuted? All authority over the actual conducting of an election for the office of fire district officers is vested with both the fire district secretary who prepares the ballots and the “resident fire district elector” [785]*785who acts as chairman of the election. (See Town Law § 175.)

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

Related

§ 16-102
New York ELN § 16-102
§ 175
New York TWN § 175

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Misc. 3d 783, 771 N.Y.S.2d 298, 2003 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foss-v-mclean-nysupct-2003.