Home/New York Court of Appeals/Hulse v. Millspaugh

Hulse v. Millspaugh

304 N.E.2d 565, 33 N.Y.2d 725, 349 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 992
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedOctober 23, 1973
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 304 N.E.2d 565 (Hulse v. Millspaugh) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hulse v. Millspaugh, 304 N.E.2d 565, 33 N.Y.2d 725, 349 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 992 (N.Y. 1973).

Opinion

In each proceeding: Order reversed, without costs, and the Board of Elections directed to accept the affidavit and acknowledgment submitted by petitioner (s). The proceeding to correct the nomination certificate nunc pro tune -and compel the Board of Elections to accept same for filing was timely commenced pursuant to subdivision 2 of section 330 of the Election Law. The petitioner (s) should have been allowed to correct the defect in the certificate of nomination by filing the required affidavit and acknowledgment nunc pro tu/nc to the date of filing of the original certificate.

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Shapiro

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

Related

Mahoney v. May
54 A.D.2d 801 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
304 N.E.2d 565, 33 N.Y.2d 725, 349 N.Y.S.2d 996, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 992, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hulse-v-millspaugh-ny-1973.