Vaccaro v. Lawley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vaccaro v. Lawley

28 A.D.2d 809, 281 N.Y.S.2d 627, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3923

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

DecidedJune 15, 1967

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 28 A.D.2d 809 (Vaccaro v. Lawley) 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

Vaccaro v. Lawley, 28 A.D.2d 809, 281 N.Y.S.2d 627, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3923 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: Petitioner purports to maintain this proceeding “ individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated.” He contends that this brings before the court all of the candidates for delegates and alternates to the 8th Judicial District Convention from Assembly Districts located wholly within Erie County. This contention is incorrect. Representative actions under section 330 of the Election Law may be maintained on behalf of candidates in the district of petitioner. They may not be maintained on behalf of candidates in election districts other than petitioner’s own. (Matter of Pearson v. Board of Elections, 284 App. Div. 649; Matter of Cantwell v. Cohen, 259 App. Div. 742; Matter of Enright v. Board of Elections, 257 App. Div. 601, appeal dsmd. as academic, 282 N. Y. 691.) Candidates other than those from the 146th Assembly District are not before this court, and we cannot pass upon the validity or invalidity of their petitions. The petition of Vaccaro and others from his Assembly District are in substantial compliance with the requirements of section 135 of the Election Law. No fraud had been demonstrated or claimed. There is no opposing slate. (Appeal from order of Erie Special Term holding the nominating petitions valid.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Henry and Del Vecchio, JJ.

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

Memorandum: Petitioner purports to maintain this proceeding “ individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated.” He contends that this brings before the court all of the candidates for delegates and alternates to the 8th Judicial District Convention from Assembly Districts located wholly within Erie County. This contention is incorrect. Representative actions under section 330 of the Election Law may be maintained on behalf of candidates in the district of petitioner. They may not be maintained on behalf of candidates in election districts other than petitioner’s own. (Matter of Pearson v. Board of Elections, 284 App. Div. 649; Matter of Cantwell v. Cohen, 259 App. Div. 742; Matter of Enright v. Board of Elections, 257 App. Div. 601, appeal dsmd. as academic, 282 N. Y. 691.) Candidates other than those from the 146th Assembly District are not before this court, and we cannot pass upon the validity or invalidity of their petitions. The petition of Vaccaro and others from his Assembly District are in substantial compliance with the requirements of section 135 of the Election Law. No fraud had been demonstrated or claimed. There is no opposing slate. (Appeal from order of Erie Special Term holding the nominating petitions valid.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Henry and Del Vecchio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A.D.2d 809, 281 N.Y.S.2d 627, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3923, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vaccaro-v-lawley-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack