Maloney v. Board of Elections

65 N.Y. 964
New York Court of Appeals·Decided August 28, 1985·Published

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.

Even if we were to strike the first volume of the candidate’s designating petition because of superfluous pages (see, Matter of Jonas v Black, 63 NY2d 685, affg 104 AD2d 466), the other three volumes of his petition contain more than ample valid signatures to entitle him to a position on the primary election ballot. The remaining defects in the petition cited by appellant, slight overstatements of total signatures on the cover sheets, are inconsequential (see, Matter of Staber v Fidler, 65 NY2d 529).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone concur.

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.

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

Maloney v. Board of Elections, 65 N.Y. 964 (N.Y. 1985).

65 N.Y. 964 (Maloney v. Board of Elections) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

MATTER OF JONAS v. Black
468 N.E.2d 1116 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)
Jonas v. Black
104 A.D.2d 466 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)