Quinones v. Bass

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Quinones v. Bass

64 A.D.2d 879, 408 N.Y.S.2d 510, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12769

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

DecidedAugust 25, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 64 A.D.2d 879 (Quinones v. Bass) 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

Quinones v. Bass, 64 A.D.2d 879, 408 N.Y.S.2d 510, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered August 23, 1978, invalidating the designating petition of Jose M. Gonzalez (Silva, Velez), unanimously modified to the extent of reversing the invalidation, on the law and on the facts, granting the petition to validate, vacating the restraint imposed upon the Board of Elections, and confirming the report of the referee, and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The evidence showed that in three cases there was proof that the registration card and the petition were obtained at the same time by the witness. The court then extended this to cover all the signatures obtained by that witness where the witness also obtained a registration card signature. This, under the circumstances, was an impermissible extension. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Silverman, Markewich, Sandler and Sullivan, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered August 23, 1978, invalidating the designating petition of Jose M. Gonzalez (Silva, Velez), unanimously modified to the extent of reversing the invalidation, on the law and on the facts, granting the petition to validate, vacating the restraint imposed upon the Board of Elections, and confirming the report of the referee, and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The evidence showed that in three cases there was proof that the registration card and the petition were obtained at the same time by the witness. The court then extended this to cover all the signatures obtained by that witness where the witness also obtained a registration card signature. This, under the circumstances, was an impermissible extension. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Silverman, Markewich, Sandler and Sullivan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 A.D.2d 879, 408 N.Y.S.2d 510, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/quinones-v-bass-nyappdiv-1978.