Porr v. Clancy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Porr v. Clancy

264 A.D.2d 459, 693 N.Y.S.2d 457, 694 N.Y.S.2d 146, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8765

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

DecidedAugust 18, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 264 A.D.2d 459 (Porr v. Clancy) 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

Porr v. Clancy, 264 A.D.2d 459, 693 N.Y.S.2d 457, 694 N.Y.S.2d 146, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8765 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to invalidate a petition for an opportunity to ballot by providing for a write-in candidate pursuant to Election Law § 6-164 in a primary election to be held on September 14, 1999, for the nomination of the Conservative Party as its candidate for the public office(s) of Mayor and Trustee of the Village of West Haverstraw, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Bergerman, J.), dated August 12, 1999, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Election Law § 6-164 does not require the pre-existence of a technically deficient designating petition (see, Matter of Coopersmith v Hershberger, 264 AD2d 453 [decided herewith]). Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Sullivan, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to invalidate a petition for an opportunity to ballot by providing for a write-in candidate pursuant to Election Law § 6-164 in a primary election to be held on September 14, 1999, for the nomination of the Conservative Party as its candidate for the public office(s) of Mayor and Trustee of the Village of West Haverstraw, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Bergerman, J.), dated August 12, 1999, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Election Law § 6-164 does not require the pre-existence of a technically deficient designating petition (see, Matter of Coopersmith v Hershberger, 264 AD2d 453 [decided herewith]). Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Sullivan, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 459, 693 N.Y.S.2d 457, 694 N.Y.S.2d 146, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8765, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/porr-v-clancy-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack