Manz v. Granger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Manz v. Granger

17 A.D.2d 719, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8398

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

DecidedAugust 31, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.2d 719 (Manz v. Granger) 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

Manz v. Granger, 17 A.D.2d 719, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8398 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, without costs of this appeal to any party, and designating petition held invalid. Memorandum: We disagree with the conclusion reached by the Trial Justice that the members of the committee on vacancies were necessary parties to this proceeding. (Matter of Kowal v. Dmochowski, 14 A D 2d 665, affd. 10 N Y 2d 794; Matter of Roman v. Power, 10 N Y 2d 793.) On the merits, we agree with the conclusions stated in the Special Term memorandum as to the invalidity of certain signatures and we adopt those conclusions as our findings. This leaves an insufficient number of valid signatures upon the petition in question. (Appeal from final order of Erie Special Term dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction.) Present — Williams, P. J., Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, without costs of this appeal to any party, and designating petition held invalid. Memorandum: We disagree with the conclusion reached by the Trial Justice that the members of the committee on vacancies were necessary parties to this proceeding. (Matter of Kowal v. Dmochowski, 14 A D 2d 665, affd. 10 N Y 2d 794; Matter of Roman v. Power, 10 N Y 2d 793.) On the merits, we agree with the conclusions stated in the Special Term memorandum as to the invalidity of certain signatures and we adopt those conclusions as our findings. This leaves an insufficient number of valid signatures upon the petition in question. (Appeal from final order of Erie Special Term dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction.) Present — Williams, P. J., Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.2d 719, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manz-v-granger-nyappdiv-1962.