Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/In re De Groot

In re De Groot

136 A.D. 899
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 15, 1909·Published

Opinion

Order of the Special Term modified in the following particulars: Ballot Exhibit Mo. 20 is a void ballot and should not have been counted for James McLaughlin. Ballot Exhibit Mo. 36 is a void ballot and should not have been counted for William A. De Groot. Ballot Exhibit, Mo. 29 [900]*900is a void ballot and should not have been counted for James F. McLaughlin. Ballot Exhibit No. 42is a void ballot and should not have been counted for James F. McLaughlin. The order, in so far as it is appealed from, as so modified,should be affirmed, without costs to either party, and. a recount had in accordance with this decision. Hirschberg, P. J., Woodward, Burr, Thomas and Rich, JJ., concurred.

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

In re De Groot, 136 A.D. 899 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1909).

136 A.D. 899 (In re De Groot) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.