Henry v. Blake

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Henry v. Blake

207 A.D.2d 508, 616 N.Y.S.2d 246

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

DecidedAugust 24, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 207 A.D.2d 508 (Henry v. Blake) 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

Henry v. Blake, 207 A.D.2d 508, 616 N.Y.S.2d 246 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding to invalidate a petition designating James Blake as a candidate in a primary election to be held on September 13, 1994, for nomination of the Democratic Party as its candidate for the public office of Member of the Assembly from the 29th Assembly District, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.), dated August 16, 1994, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The appellant conceded at oral argument that his counterclaim to validate his designating petition was untimely. Thus, the issue of whether the Board of Elections of the City of New York incorrectly determined that certain signatures were invalid was not properly before the Supreme Court (see, Matter of Krueger v Richards, 59 NY2d 680; Matter of Suarez v Sadowski, 48 NY2d 620). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding to invalidate a petition designating James Blake as a candidate in a primary election to be held on September 13, 1994, for nomination of the Democratic Party as its candidate for the public office of Member of the Assembly from the 29th Assembly District, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.), dated August 16, 1994, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The appellant conceded at oral argument that his counterclaim to validate his designating petition was untimely. Thus, the issue of whether the Board of Elections of the City of New York incorrectly determined that certain signatures were invalid was not properly before the Supreme Court (see, Matter of Krueger v Richards, 59 NY2d 680; Matter of Suarez v Sadowski, 48 NY2d 620). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 508, 616 N.Y.S.2d 246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-v-blake-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack