Reda v. Lefever

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reda v. Lefever

112 A.D.2d 1070, 492 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52276

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

DecidedAugust 21, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 112 A.D.2d 1070 (Reda v. Lefever) 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

Reda v. Lefever, 112 A.D.2d 1070, 492 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52276 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to invalidate petitions for an opportunity to ballot, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Donovan, J.), entered August 7, 1985, which granted the application.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Over 100 signatories to the petitions herein had previously signed designating petitions for the same public offices. Since the validity of those other petitions has been upheld (see, Matter of Fromson v Lefever, 112 AD2d 1064), the signatures to the instant petitions must be disallowed (Election Law § 6-134 [5]; Matter of Gilmore v Kugler, 21 AD2d 293, 295). The number of signatures remaining after deducting the disallowed signatures is insufficient and, accordingly, the petitions [1071]*1071were properly invalidated. Brown, J. P., O’Connor, Weinstein, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to invalidate petitions for an opportunity to ballot, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Donovan, J.), entered August 7, 1985, which granted the application.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Over 100 signatories to the petitions herein had previously signed designating petitions for the same public offices. Since the validity of those other petitions has been upheld (see, Matter of Fromson v Lefever, 112 AD2d 1064), the signatures to the instant petitions must be disallowed (Election Law § 6-134 [5]; Matter of Gilmore v Kugler, 21 AD2d 293, 295). The number of signatures remaining after deducting the disallowed signatures is insufficient and, accordingly, the petitions [1071]*1071were properly invalidated. Brown, J. P., O’Connor, Weinstein, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 A.D.2d 1070, 492 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52276, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reda-v-lefever-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack