Gardner v. Mahoney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gardner v. Mahoney

123 A.D.2d 520, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60282

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

DecidedSeptember 26, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 123 A.D.2d 520 (Gardner v. Mahoney) 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

Gardner v. Mahoney, 123 A.D.2d 520, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60282 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: A designating petition is not invalid because a candidate uses a familiar form of a proper first name instead of the proper name used on his voter registration form (cf. Election Law § 6-134 [7]). There was sufficient evidence to prove that candidate "Jerry Dalton” was one and the same person as registered voter "Gerald F. Dalton” of the same address. Moreover, there has been no showing that Dalton’s use of the familiar form of his proper name ("Jerry” for "Gerald”) would, or did, tend to mislead potential signatories as to his identity. Under these circumstances, there was no "reasonable probability of confusing or deceiving the signers, voters or board of elections” (Matter of Donnelly v McNab, 83 AD2d 896, lv denied 54 NY2d 603). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, McGowan, J.—Election Law.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Green, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ. (Order entered Aug. 21, 1986.)

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

Order unanimously reversed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: A designating petition is not invalid because a candidate uses a familiar form of a proper first name instead of the proper name used on his voter registration form (cf. Election Law § 6-134 [7]). There was sufficient evidence to prove that candidate "Jerry Dalton” was one and the same person as registered voter "Gerald F. Dalton” of the same address. Moreover, there has been no showing that Dalton’s use of the familiar form of his proper name ("Jerry” for "Gerald”) would, or did, tend to mislead potential signatories as to his identity. Under these circumstances, there was no "reasonable probability of confusing or deceiving the signers, voters or board of elections” (Matter of Donnelly v McNab, 83 AD2d 896, lv denied 54 NY2d 603). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, McGowan, J.—Election Law.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Green, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ. (Order entered Aug. 21, 1986.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 A.D.2d 520, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60282, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gardner-v-mahoney-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack