Roland v. Toepfer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Roland v. Toepfer

64 A.D.2d 938, 407 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12846

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

DecidedAugust 24, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 64 A.D.2d 938 (Roland v. Toepfer) 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

Roland v. Toepfer, 64 A.D.2d 938, 407 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12846 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding, inter alia, to invalidate petitions designating certain of the respondents as candidates in the Conservative Party primary election to be held on September 12, 1978, for the [939]*939party position of County Committeemen from the 95th and 96th Assembly Districts, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered August 17, 1978, which, after a hearing, denied the application. Judgment reversed, without costs or disbursements, and proceeding remanded to Special Term for a hearing in accordance herewith. Upon the record, we find that Special Term’s findings of fact as to the specific objections to the petitions were inadequate and provide an insufficient basis on which to render a determination. Specific findings of fact are necessary. In addition, it is not clear whether service was made in accordance with the provisions of the order to show cause. Upon further hearing, this question should also be fully explored. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Damiani, Shapiro and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding, inter alia, to invalidate petitions designating certain of the respondents as candidates in the Conservative Party primary election to be held on September 12, 1978, for the [939]*939party position of County Committeemen from the 95th and 96th Assembly Districts, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, entered August 17, 1978, which, after a hearing, denied the application. Judgment reversed, without costs or disbursements, and proceeding remanded to Special Term for a hearing in accordance herewith. Upon the record, we find that Special Term’s findings of fact as to the specific objections to the petitions were inadequate and provide an insufficient basis on which to render a determination. Specific findings of fact are necessary. In addition, it is not clear whether service was made in accordance with the provisions of the order to show cause. Upon further hearing, this question should also be fully explored. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Damiani, Shapiro and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 A.D.2d 938, 407 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roland-v-toepfer-nyappdiv-1978.