MATTER OF FRANCO v. Velez

New York Court of Appeals

MATTER OF FRANCO v. Velez

483 N.E.2d 1154, 65 N.Y.2d 967, 65 N.Y. 967, 493 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 15984

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 28, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 483 N.E.2d 1154 (MATTER OF FRANCO v. Velez) 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 FRANCO v. Velez, 483 N.E.2d 1154, 65 N.Y.2d 967, 65 N.Y. 967, 493 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 15984 (N.Y. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

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

The Appellate Division found that 21 volumes were submitted by respondent. They were numbered sequentially beginning with “1” and ending with “21”. Although there were no volumes numbered “5”, “12” or “14”, two volumes were each labeled “10” and two separately submitted volumes were labeled “1”. As found below, when these volumes are substituted for volumes “5”, “12” and “14”, there are 21 volumes as indicated on the cover sheet. Moreover, since 5,000 signatures are required and respondent’s petition contained over 18,000 signatures, elimination of these volumes, which contained only some 5,000 signatures, still would leave more than 13,000 valid signatures.

Accordingly, respondent’s petition was properly validated.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

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

The Appellate Division found that 21 volumes were submitted by respondent. They were numbered sequentially beginning with “1” and ending with “21”. Although there were no volumes numbered “5”, “12” or “14”, two volumes were each labeled “10” and two separately submitted volumes were labeled “1”. As found below, when these volumes are substituted for volumes “5”, “12” and “14”, there are 21 volumes as indicated on the cover sheet. Moreover, since 5,000 signatures are required and respondent’s petition contained over 18,000 signatures, elimination of these volumes, which contained only some 5,000 signatures, still would leave more than 13,000 valid signatures.

Accordingly, respondent’s petition was properly validated.

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

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

483 N.E.2d 1154, 65 N.Y.2d 967, 65 N.Y. 967, 493 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 15984, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-franco-v-velez-ny-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack