Krupczak v. Mancini

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Krupczak v. Mancini

133 A.D.2d 288, 518 N.Y.S.2d 853, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49781

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

DecidedAugust 21, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 133 A.D.2d 288 (Krupczak v. Mancini) 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

Krupczak v. Mancini, 133 A.D.2d 288, 518 N.Y.S.2d 853, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49781 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (White, J.), entered August 11, 1987 in Montgomery County, which denied petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16-102, to, inter alia, declare invalid the certificates of authorization naming respondent Lesley Lanzi as the Republican candidate for the office of Alderperson for the City of Amsterdam in the September 15, 1987 primary election.

[289]*289Due to the fact that petitioner is not a member of the Republican Party and her challenge is based on claimed defects in party procedure, she lacks standing to challenge the validity of the certificates of authorization at issue (see, Matter of Wydler v Cristenfeld, 35 NY2d 719; Matter of Bennett v Justin, 77 AD2d 960, affd 51 NY2d 722). The judgment should therefore be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (White, J.), entered August 11, 1987 in Montgomery County, which denied petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16-102, to, inter alia, declare invalid the certificates of authorization naming respondent Lesley Lanzi as the Republican candidate for the office of Alderperson for the City of Amsterdam in the September 15, 1987 primary election.

[289]*289Due to the fact that petitioner is not a member of the Republican Party and her challenge is based on claimed defects in party procedure, she lacks standing to challenge the validity of the certificates of authorization at issue (see, Matter of Wydler v Cristenfeld, 35 NY2d 719; Matter of Bennett v Justin, 77 AD2d 960, affd 51 NY2d 722). The judgment should therefore be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

133 A.D.2d 288, 518 N.Y.S.2d 853, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/krupczak-v-mancini-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack