Hanofee v. Board of Elections

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hanofee v. Board of Elections

24 A.D.2d 729, 263 N.Y.S.2d 314, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3368

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

DecidedSeptember 24, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 24 A.D.2d 729 (Hanofee v. Board of Elections) 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

Hanofee v. Board of Elections, 24 A.D.2d 729, 263 N.Y.S.2d 314, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3368 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum by the Court.

In Proceeding No. 1, Special Term properly-found valid the candidacy of respondent Williams and dismissed the petition as to him; but the evidence mandated the same disposition in respect of respondent Ratner and, petitioner Sykes being a “ candidate aggrieved ” (Election Law, § 330, subd. 1), the filing of objections was not prerequisite to the commencement of the proceeding by him. Order in Proceeding No. 1 modified, on the law and the facts, in accordance with this memorandum and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. .In Proceeding No. 2, order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

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

Memorandum by the Court.

In Proceeding No. 1, Special Term properly-found valid the candidacy of respondent Williams and dismissed the petition as to him; but the evidence mandated the same disposition in respect of respondent Ratner and, petitioner Sykes being a “ candidate aggrieved ” (Election Law, § 330, subd. 1), the filing of objections was not prerequisite to the commencement of the proceeding by him. Order in Proceeding No. 1 modified, on the law and the facts, in accordance with this memorandum and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. .In Proceeding No. 2, order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 729, 263 N.Y.S.2d 314, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hanofee-v-board-of-elections-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack