McShane v. Coveney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McShane v. Coveney

49 A.D.2d 711, 372 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10598

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

DecidedAugust 27, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 49 A.D.2d 711 (McShane v. Coveney) 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

McShane v. Coveney, 49 A.D.2d 711, 372 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to invalidate petitions designating appellant Noto as a candidate in the Conservative Party primary election to be held on September 9, 1975 for nomination for the public office of legislator, 12th Legislative District, County of Suffolk, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered August 20, 1975, which granted the application. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs; determination of the Commissioners of Election reinstated; and the name of candidate Noto directed to be placed on the ballot, with the following memorandum: Eight signatures were invalidated because four names appeared twice on the petition. In our opinion, only four should have been eliminated, which would leave the petition valid. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Christ, Benjamin and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to invalidate petitions designating appellant Noto as a candidate in the Conservative Party primary election to be held on September 9, 1975 for nomination for the public office of legislator, 12th Legislative District, County of Suffolk, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered August 20, 1975, which granted the application. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs; determination of the Commissioners of Election reinstated; and the name of candidate Noto directed to be placed on the ballot, with the following memorandum: Eight signatures were invalidated because four names appeared twice on the petition. In our opinion, only four should have been eliminated, which would leave the petition valid. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Christ, Benjamin and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.2d 711, 372 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcshane-v-coveney-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack