Gangemi v. Board of Elections

109 A.D.3d 541, 970 N.Y.S.2d 470
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 14, 2013·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16-102, inter alia, to validate a petition designating John F. Gangemi as a candidate in a primary election to be held on September 10, 2013, for the nomination of the Democratic Party as its candidate for the public office of Brooklyn Borough President, the petitioner appeals from a final order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated August 8, 2013, which dismissed the proceeding as untimely.

Ordered that the final order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

“A proceeding with respect to a petition shall be instituted within fourteen days after the last day to file the petition, or within three business days after the officer or board with whom or which such petition was filed, makes a determination of invalidity with respect to such petition, whichever is later” (Election Law § 16-102 [2]). Here, the petitioner was notified on July 19, 2013, that his designating petition had been invalidated by the Board of Elections in the City of New York (hereinafter the Board) pursuant to rule D6 of the duly adopted Designating Petition and Opportunity to Ballot Petition Rules for the September 2013 Primary Election (hereinafter rule D6). Rule D6 provides for a final determination of invalidity upon a potential candidate’s failure to cure a defect within his or her designating petition (see Matter of Leroy v Board of Elections in City of N.Y., 65 AD3d 645, 645 [2009]).

[542] The petitioner commenced this proceeding on August 2, 2013, which was 22 days after the last day to file the designating petition, and 10 business days after the Board determined that the designating petition was invalid. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the proceeding as untimely (see Election Law § 16-102 [2]; Matter of McDonough v Scannapieco, 65 AD3d 647, 648 [2009]; Matter of Leroy v Board of Elections in City of N.Y., 65 AD 3d at 645-646; Matter of Sayegh v Scannapieco, 10 AD3d 439 [2004]). In light of the foregoing, the petitioner’s remaining contentions have been rendered academic. Dillon, J.E, Angiolillo, Dickerson and Cohen, JJ., concur.

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

Gangemi v. Board of Elections, 109 A.D.3d 541, 970 N.Y.S.2d 470 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

109 A.D.3d 541 (Gangemi v. Board of Elections) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of Brown v. Commissioners of the City of New York Bd. of Elections
2020 NY Slip Op 3369 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Echevarria v. Board of Elections in the City of N.Y.
2020 NY Slip Op 2992 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Santos v. Board of Elections in the City of N.Y.
2017 NY Slip Op 7380 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)