In re Poole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Poole

95 N.Y.S. 1155

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

DecidedNovember 2, 1905

StatusPublished

This text of 95 N.Y.S. 1155 (In re Poole) 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 Poole, 95 N.Y.S. 1155 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this case there was one certificate filed to which objections were made; but, before the time for filing certificates had expired, two additional certificates were submitted. Upon the three certificates there appeared 1,700 names. As the law allows separate certificates to be filed, we find no difficulty in considering all of the certificates, and the question is whether upon all of the certificates there are genuine signatures of 500 men. Making the deductions shown by the papers for duplicate signatures, signatures in the same handwriting, affidavits of those who did not sign, and nonresidents proved by sufficient evidence, there remain more than sufficient signatures to comply with the provisions of the law. The order of the Special Term, affirming the determination of the board of elections, should be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this case there was one certificate filed to which objections were made; but, before the time for filing certificates had expired, two additional certificates were submitted. Upon the three certificates there appeared 1,700 names. As the law allows separate certificates to be filed, we find no difficulty in considering all of the certificates, and the question is whether upon all of the certificates there are genuine signatures of 500 men. Making the deductions shown by the papers for duplicate signatures, signatures in the same handwriting, affidavits of those who did not sign, and nonresidents proved by sufficient evidence, there remain more than sufficient signatures to comply with the provisions of the law. The order of the Special Term, affirming the determination of the board of elections, should be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

95 N.Y.S. 1155, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-poole-nyappdiv-1905.