In re Haugh

127 N.Y.S. 747
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 24, 1910
StatusPublished

This text of 127 N.Y.S. 747 (In re Haugh) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Haugh, 127 N.Y.S. 747 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1910).

Opinion

STAPLETON, J.

I am required by authority to annul the determination of the board of elections of the city of New York. Matter of Thomas, 128 App. Div. 330, 112 N. Y. Supp. 664; Matter of Byrne, 128 App. Div. 334, 112 N. Y. Supp. 699. The only judicial limitation placed upon the general phrase “any citizen” has been that it is possible it should be limited to a qualified elector residing in the district for which the officer is to be chosen, and that the applicant be the person who instituted the proceeding by filing the objection. Matter of [748]*748Social Democratic Party, 182 N. Y. 442, 448, 449, 75 N. E. 415. The applicant is within the class as thus limited. It is too late now for a valid nomination. Sections 128 and 136, Election Law; Matter of Halpin, 108 App. Div. 271, 278, 95 N. Y. Supp. 611.

Motion granted.

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

Related

In re Halpin
108 A.D. 271 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1905)
In re Thomas
128 A.D. 330 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)
In re Byrne
128 A.D. 334 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 N.Y.S. 747, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-haugh-nysupct-1910.