Matter of Haskell v. Voorhis

New York Court of Appeals

Matter of Haskell v. Voorhis

158 N.E. 613, 246 N.Y. 256, 1927 N.Y. LEXIS 870

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 26, 1927

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 158 N.E. 613 (Matter of Haskell v. Voorhis) 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 Haskell v. Voorhis, 158 N.E. 613, 246 N.Y. 256, 1927 N.Y. LEXIS 870 (N.Y. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We hold in the circumstances of this case that there was no unjust discrimination to the prejudice of the petitioner.

The Anti-Dry League nominated a single candidate for a single office. A member of that league would have no difficulty in finding the name of that candidate upon the machine, and would not be diverted by the form of the machine into a belief that the name of such candidate was to be looked for elsewhere.

*258 The question is not here whether unfairness or prejudice would result if the League had nominated other candidates whose names were placed upon a separate horizontal column to- the exclusion of the petitioner’s, and as to that we express no opinion.

The order should be affirmed without costs.

Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Andrews, Lehman and O’Brien, JJ., concur; Kellogg, J., dissents.

Order affirmed, etc.

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