Home/New York Court of Appeals/Prescott v. Jones

Prescott v. Jones

368 N.E.2d 37, 42 N.Y.2d 990, 398 N.Y.S.2d 415, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2313
New York Court of Appeals·Decided August 31, 1977·Published

Opinion

[991]*991Memorandum. On this record, which included a consideration of the signatures which were the subject matter of Farber v Carroll (42 NY2d 994 [decided herewith]), there is no basis for us to disturb the factual finding of Special Term, as affirmed by the Appellate Division, that the petition here contains over 10,000 valid signatures (as presently required by Election Law, § 136, subd 6, par [a]) and is not permeated with fraud as a matter of law (Matter of Ruiz v McKenna, 40 NY2d 815; cf. Matter of Proskin v Nolan, 40 NY2d 829).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.

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

Prescott v. Jones, 368 N.E.2d 37, 42 N.Y.2d 990, 398 N.Y.S.2d 415, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2313 (N.Y. 1977).

368 N.E.2d 37 (Prescott v. Jones) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ruiz v. McKenna
355 N.E.2d 787 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
Proskin v. May
355 N.E.2d 793 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
Farber v. Carroll
368 N.E.2d 38 (New York Court of Appeals, 1977)