Widelitz v. Dumain

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Widelitz v. Dumain

218 A.D.2d 777, 630 N.Y.S.2d 953, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8886

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 23, 1995·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In a Proceeding to invalidate a petition designating certain of the respondents as candidates in a primary election to be held on September 12,1995, for the Republican Party positions of Male and Female Members of the Republican State Committee, Delegates and Alternate Delegates to the 2nd Judicial District Republican Convention, and Members of the Kings County Republican County Committee from the 46th Assembly District, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), dated August 9,1995, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

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

We agree with the Supreme Court’s finding, based upon its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, that the appellants did not demonstrate any fraud or impropriety regarding the objections filed against them (see, Matter of Eve v Mahoney, 45 AD2d 945).

[778]*778The appellants’ remaining contention is without merit. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Santucci, Joy and Friedmann, 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 designating certain of the respondents as candidates in a primary election to be held on September 12,1995, for the Republican Party positions of Male and Female Members of the Republican State Committee, Delegates and Alternate Delegates to the 2nd Judicial District Republican Convention, and Members of the Kings County Republican County Committee from the 46th Assembly District, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), dated August 9,1995, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

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

We agree with the Supreme Court’s finding, based upon its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, that the appellants did not demonstrate any fraud or impropriety regarding the objections filed against them (see, Matter of Eve v Mahoney, 45 AD2d 945).

[778]*778The appellants’ remaining contention is without merit. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Santucci, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Widelitz v. Dumain, 218 A.D.2d 777, 630 N.Y.S.2d 953, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

218 A.D.2d 777 (Widelitz v. Dumain) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related