MATTER OF LIVRERI v. Gargiulo

New York Court of Appeals

MATTER OF LIVRERI v. Gargiulo

404 N.E.2d 1324, 49 N.Y.2d 832, 427 N.Y.S.2d 783, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2201

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 19, 1980

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 404 N.E.2d 1324 (MATTER OF LIVRERI v. Gargiulo) 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 LIVRERI v. Gargiulo, 404 N.E.2d 1324, 49 N.Y.2d 832, 427 N.Y.S.2d 783, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2201 (N.Y. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The orders appealed from should be affirmed, without costs. Our examination of the record persuades us that the courts below did not err as a matter of law in concluding that there are a sufficient number of valid signatures on the petition. We note that in light of the fact that both judgments of Supreme Court were affirmed by the Appellate Division, we may not review any claimed factual errors (see CPLR 5501, subd [b]). While it would appear that the courts below erroneously deemed valid those pages of the petition upon which there existed an error, omission, or unexplained alteration in that part of the witness statement indicating the number of signatures on each page (see Matter of Klemann v Acito, 45 NY2d 796), there exist sufficient valid signatures even discounting those pages. Finally, we note that the courts below did not exceed their power in granting relief with respect to all candidates included in these petitions since their legal rights and interests are identical and the papers clearly disclosed that it was intended that they be parties to the proceeding. We have examined appellants’ other arguments, and find them to be without merit.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Orders affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The orders appealed from should be affirmed, without costs. Our examination of the record persuades us that the courts below did not err as a matter of law in concluding that there are a sufficient number of valid signatures on the petition. We note that in light of the fact that both judgments of Supreme Court were affirmed by the Appellate Division, we may not review any claimed factual errors (see CPLR 5501, subd [b]). While it would appear that the courts below erroneously deemed valid those pages of the petition upon which there existed an error, omission, or unexplained alteration in that part of the witness statement indicating the number of signatures on each page (see Matter of Klemann v Acito, 45 NY2d 796), there exist sufficient valid signatures even discounting those pages. Finally, we note that the courts below did not exceed their power in granting relief with respect to all candidates included in these petitions since their legal rights and interests are identical and the papers clearly disclosed that it was intended that they be parties to the proceeding. We have examined appellants’ other arguments, and find them to be without merit.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Orders affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

404 N.E.2d 1324, 49 N.Y.2d 832, 427 N.Y.S.2d 783, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-livreri-v-gargiulo-ny-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack