In re Jerge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Jerge

230 A.D. 870

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 230 A.D. 870 (In re Jerge) 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

In re Jerge, 230 A.D. 870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The petitioner in this proceeding is seeking to have his name removed from the ballot as the nominee of the Democratic party for the office of member of Congress in the forty-first district. After his nomination at the primary he filed a declination and shows that he was out of the country at the time the original designating petitions were filed and until after the time for [871]*871declining the designation had expired. It has been said in such cases as this that a legislative remedy must be found to authorize relief. (Matter of Neary v. Voorhis, 207 App. Div. 419.) We have searched the Election Law in vain for any legislative enactment which would authorize the granting of the relief sought by the petitioner. In fact, the right to file a declination of nomination in such a case as is here involved is expressly denied by the statute. (Election Law, § 138.) All concur. Present-—Sears, P. J., Crouch, Taylor, Edgeomb and Thompson, JJ. Order affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.

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

Per Curiam.

The petitioner in this proceeding is seeking to have his name removed from the ballot as the nominee of the Democratic party for the office of member of Congress in the forty-first district. After his nomination at the primary he filed a declination and shows that he was out of the country at the time the original designating petitions were filed and until after the time for [871]*871declining the designation had expired. It has been said in such cases as this that a legislative remedy must be found to authorize relief. (Matter of Neary v. Voorhis, 207 App. Div. 419.) We have searched the Election Law in vain for any legislative enactment which would authorize the granting of the relief sought by the petitioner. In fact, the right to file a declination of nomination in such a case as is here involved is expressly denied by the statute. (Election Law, § 138.) All concur. Present-—Sears, P. J., Crouch, Taylor, Edgeomb and Thompson, JJ. Order affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 A.D. 870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jerge-nyappdiv-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack