Swirsky v. Smallwood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Swirsky v. Smallwood

148 A.D.2d 523, 540 N.Y.S.2d 177, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2743

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

DecidedMarch 13, 1989

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 148 A.D.2d 523 (Swirsky v. Smallwood) 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

Swirsky v. Smallwood, 148 A.D.2d 523, 540 N.Y.S.2d 177, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2743 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to invalidate a petition nominating Harry S. Taubenfeld as candidate for the public office of Trustee of the Village of Cedarhurst, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roberto, J.), entered March 3, 1989, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The proceeding must be dismissed as jurisdictionally defective because the objector failed to join and serve a necessary party, that is, the other candidate whose name appears on the challenged petition (see, CPLR 1001 [a]; Matter of Miranda v Erie County Bd. of Elections, 59 AD2d 643; cf., Matter of McGoey v Black, 100 AD2d 635). Mangano, J. P., Lawrence, Hooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to invalidate a petition nominating Harry S. Taubenfeld as candidate for the public office of Trustee of the Village of Cedarhurst, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roberto, J.), entered March 3, 1989, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The proceeding must be dismissed as jurisdictionally defective because the objector failed to join and serve a necessary party, that is, the other candidate whose name appears on the challenged petition (see, CPLR 1001 [a]; Matter of Miranda v Erie County Bd. of Elections, 59 AD2d 643; cf., Matter of McGoey v Black, 100 AD2d 635). Mangano, J. P., Lawrence, Hooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 A.D.2d 523, 540 N.Y.S.2d 177, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2743, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swirsky-v-smallwood-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack