McDowell v. Werbalowsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McDowell v. Werbalowsky

33 A.D.2d 974, 304 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3133

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

DecidedOctober 20, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 33 A.D.2d 974 (McDowell v. Werbalowsky) 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

McDowell v. Werbalowsky, 33 A.D.2d 974, 304 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3133 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered October 16, 1969 in Ulster County, which, in a proceeding under section 330 of the Election Law, permitted the Committees on Vacancies of the Democratic Party and the Anti-Sales Tax Party to file certificates designating respondent Majestic as their candidate for the office of Supervisor of the Town of Gardiner to fill a vacancy, affirmed without costs. Since said respondent’s purported designation as a candidate for the office of county legislator has been invalidated, he is no longer disqualified as a candidate for the town office. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Greenblott, Cooke and Sweeney, JJ., concur in memorandum Per Curiam.

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

Per Curiam.

Order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered October 16, 1969 in Ulster County, which, in a proceeding under section 330 of the Election Law, permitted the Committees on Vacancies of the Democratic Party and the Anti-Sales Tax Party to file certificates designating respondent Majestic as their candidate for the office of Supervisor of the Town of Gardiner to fill a vacancy, affirmed without costs. Since said respondent’s purported designation as a candidate for the office of county legislator has been invalidated, he is no longer disqualified as a candidate for the town office. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Greenblott, Cooke and Sweeney, JJ., concur in memorandum Per Curiam.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 974, 304 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdowell-v-werbalowsky-nyappdiv-1969.