Hariton v. McNab

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hariton v. McNab

83 A.D.2d 897, 443 N.Y.S.2d 151, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15316

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

DecidedAugust 28, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 83 A.D.2d 897 (Hariton v. McNab) 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

Hariton v. McNab, 83 A.D.2d 897, 443 N.Y.S.2d 151, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15316 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to invalidate petitions designating respondent John P. Finnerty as a candidate in the Right to Life Party Primary Election to be held on September 10, 1981 for the public office of Suffolk County Legislator in the 11th Legislative District, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gerard, J.), dated August 18, 1981, which dismissed the proceeding. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Petitioner lacks standing (see Matter of Menendez v McNab, 83 AD2d 893). Were petitioner deemed to have standing, we would find no merit in his argument that the Right to Life Party has failed to validly designate the office in issue (see Matter of Donnelly v McNab, 83 AD2d 896). Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to invalidate petitions designating respondent John P. Finnerty as a candidate in the Right to Life Party Primary Election to be held on September 10, 1981 for the public office of Suffolk County Legislator in the 11th Legislative District, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gerard, J.), dated August 18, 1981, which dismissed the proceeding. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Petitioner lacks standing (see Matter of Menendez v McNab, 83 AD2d 893). Were petitioner deemed to have standing, we would find no merit in his argument that the Right to Life Party has failed to validly designate the office in issue (see Matter of Donnelly v McNab, 83 AD2d 896). Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 A.D.2d 897, 443 N.Y.S.2d 151, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15316, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hariton-v-mcnab-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack