MATTER OF BEATTY v. Owens

New York Court of Appeals

MATTER OF BEATTY v. Owens

443 N.E.2d 475, 57 N.Y.2d 952, 457 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3820

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 25, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 443 N.E.2d 475 (MATTER OF BEATTY v. Owens) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

MATTER OF BEATTY v. Owens, 443 N.E.2d 475, 57 N.Y.2d 952, 457 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3820 (N.Y. 1982).

Pincite

Opinions

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Never before have we imposed the sanction of depriving a primary candidate of an election victory absent a showing of that candidate’s responsibility for the fraud or misconduct, nor does the record in this case warrant the imposition of such a sanction. Petitioner failed to present evidence sufficient to establish irregularities or misconduct under either the rule of Matter of De Martini v Power (27 NY2d 149) and Matter of Ippolito v Power (22 NY2d 594) or Matter of Lowenstein v Larkin (40 AD2d 604, affd 31 NY2d 654). Indeed, the Appellate Division acknowl[954]*954edged that the number of irregularities were not sufficient to change the result of the election or justify ordering a new election.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Never before have we imposed the sanction of depriving a primary candidate of an election victory absent a showing of that candidate’s responsibility for the fraud or misconduct, nor does the record in this case warrant the imposition of such a sanction. Petitioner failed to present evidence sufficient to establish irregularities or misconduct under either the rule of Matter of De Martini v Power (27 NY2d 149) and Matter of Ippolito v Power (22 NY2d 594) or Matter of Lowenstein v Larkin (40 AD2d 604, affd 31 NY2d 654). Indeed, the Appellate Division acknowl[954]*954edged that the number of irregularities were not sufficient to change the result of the election or justify ordering a new election.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

443 N.E.2d 475, 57 N.Y.2d 952, 457 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3820, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-beatty-v-owens-ny-1982.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack