Ruiz v. Dinkins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ruiz v. Dinkins

41 A.D.2d 928, 344 N.Y.S.2d 979, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4407

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

DecidedMay 22, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 41 A.D.2d 928 (Ruiz v. Dinkins) 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

Ruiz v. Dinkins, 41 A.D.2d 928, 344 N.Y.S.2d 979, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4407 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered May 21, 1973, dismissed, without costs and without disbursements, for lack of a record. Assuming, however, that the record would be substantially in the form claimed by appellant on the argument, we would, if wé did not dismiss, affirm upon the merits. Concur — Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.; Nunez, J., dissents in the following memorandum: I would remand to Special Term to give appellant an opportunity to establish the legality of a sufficient number of signatures to qualify. Ruiz has been denied fundamental fairness. For lack of time and facilities at the Board of Elections he was not permitted to show that he had filed a sufficient number of valid signatures to be placed on the ballot. He should have been permitted to do so. The ultimate decision — who is to be elected — should be made by the voters and not by this or any other court.

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

Appeal from judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered May 21, 1973, dismissed, without costs and without disbursements, for lack of a record. Assuming, however, that the record would be substantially in the form claimed by appellant on the argument, we would, if wé did not dismiss, affirm upon the merits. Concur — Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Steuer and Capozzoli, JJ.; Nunez, J., dissents in the following memorandum: I would remand to Special Term to give appellant an opportunity to establish the legality of a sufficient number of signatures to qualify. Ruiz has been denied fundamental fairness. For lack of time and facilities at the Board of Elections he was not permitted to show that he had filed a sufficient number of valid signatures to be placed on the ballot. He should have been permitted to do so. The ultimate decision — who is to be elected — should be made by the voters and not by this or any other court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.2d 928, 344 N.Y.S.2d 979, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4407, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ruiz-v-dinkins-nyappdiv-1973.