Murray v. Gargiulo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Murray v. Gargiulo

83 A.D.2d 894, 442 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15305

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

DecidedAugust 27, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 83 A.D.2d 894 (Murray v. Gargiulo) 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

Murray v. Gargiulo, 83 A.D.2d 894, 442 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15305 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to validate a petition designating petitioner as a candidate in the Democratic Party Primary Election to be held on September 10, 1981 for the public office of Council Member from the First Councilmanic District, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rubin, J.), dated August 14, 1981, which dismissed the proceeding. Judgment reversed, without costs or disbursements, and matter remitted to Special Term for proceedings consistent herewith. The failure to include a venue caption in the statement of a Commissioner of Deeds appended to a designating petition is a technical irregularity which is insufficient to invalidate a petition. Accordingly, the signatures determined to be invalid by Special Term as a result of the lack of a venue caption are not invalid for that reason. We cannot, however, grant the petition to validate the candidate’s designating petition. The matter must be remitted to Special Term to determine whether any of the signatures contained in the petition are invalid for other reasons which might have been raised before Special Term but were not considered by that court in its determination. Damiani, J.P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Bracken, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to validate a petition designating petitioner as a candidate in the Democratic Party Primary Election to be held on September 10, 1981 for the public office of Council Member from the First Councilmanic District, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rubin, J.), dated August 14, 1981, which dismissed the proceeding. Judgment reversed, without costs or disbursements, and matter remitted to Special Term for proceedings consistent herewith. The failure to include a venue caption in the statement of a Commissioner of Deeds appended to a designating petition is a technical irregularity which is insufficient to invalidate a petition. Accordingly, the signatures determined to be invalid by Special Term as a result of the lack of a venue caption are not invalid for that reason. We cannot, however, grant the petition to validate the candidate’s designating petition. The matter must be remitted to Special Term to determine whether any of the signatures contained in the petition are invalid for other reasons which might have been raised before Special Term but were not considered by that court in its determination. Damiani, J.P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Bracken, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 A.D.2d 894, 442 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murray-v-gargiulo-nyappdiv-1981.