Margulies v. Hartwell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Margulies v. Hartwell

231 A.D.2d 840, 648 N.Y.S.2d 394, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14193

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

DecidedSeptember 27, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 231 A.D.2d 840 (Margulies v. Hartwell) 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

Margulies v. Hartwell, 231 A.D.2d 840, 648 N.Y.S.2d 394, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14193 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition seeking to invalidate the petition designating Joan W. Scalise as the Democratic candidate for the office of Comptroller of the City of Utica. The court invalidated 358 of the 1,742 signatures on the designating petition. Petitioner, however, failed to present proof sufficient to warrant invalidation of the 1,384 remaining valid signatures. ''[S]omething more than petitioner’s pure speculation is required to invalidate the signatures” (Matter of Berbary v Moss, 154 AD2d 870, 871). Petitioner was given the opportunity to proffer evidentiary proof to support his objections to the designating petition and failed to do so. We have considered the remaining objections advanced by petitioner and conclude that each one is lacking in merit. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J.—Election Law.) Present—Green, J. P., Fallon, Wesley, Doerr and Davis, JJ., concur. (Filed Aug. 21, 1996.)

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition seeking to invalidate the petition designating Joan W. Scalise as the Democratic candidate for the office of Comptroller of the City of Utica. The court invalidated 358 of the 1,742 signatures on the designating petition. Petitioner, however, failed to present proof sufficient to warrant invalidation of the 1,384 remaining valid signatures. ''[S]omething more than petitioner’s pure speculation is required to invalidate the signatures” (Matter of Berbary v Moss, 154 AD2d 870, 871). Petitioner was given the opportunity to proffer evidentiary proof to support his objections to the designating petition and failed to do so. We have considered the remaining objections advanced by petitioner and conclude that each one is lacking in merit. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J.—Election Law.) Present—Green, J. P., Fallon, Wesley, Doerr and Davis, JJ., concur. (Filed Aug. 21, 1996.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

231 A.D.2d 840, 648 N.Y.S.2d 394, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/margulies-v-hartwell-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack