Hyperlawhypertext legal database In re Drislane 248 A.D. 937

← Cases

In re Drislane

248 A.D. 937 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1936-10-22 English

Contents

Majority

p. 937
In the Matter of the Application of William E. Drislane and Orvis A. Brenenstuhl for an Order Striking Out as Invalid and Void a Petition Purporting to Nominate Joseph A. Bertasso and Others for Electors of the President and Vice-President of the United States, and Emmet J. Larkin for Governor of the State of New York, and Other Persons for Public Office, as Candidates of an Alleged Independent Body Designated “ The Union Party,” Filed in the Office of the Secretary of State on the 6th Day of October, 1936; and Directing That the Names of Candidates on Said Petition Shall Not Be Placed on the Official Ballots to Be Used in the Election to Be Held November 3, 1936; and for Other Relief.

This is an appeal from a final order of the Special Term of the Supreme Court, Albany county, made and entered on the 21st day of October, 1936, which order declared null and void a nominating petition filed in the office of the Secretary of State, purporting to nominate, under the name of “ The Union Party,” candidates for electors of President and Vice-President of the United States, and also candidates for other public offices, on the ground that an insufficient number of valid signatures appears on such petitions in the counties of Chemung, Schuyler, Rock-land and Putnam. In the case of Matter of Gruskin [ante, p. 936], decided herewith, it was conceded upon the argument and held by this court that there were not sufficient valid signatures for the nominations of “ The Union Party ” in the county of Putnam, and again the same fact was conceded on this argument. In

p. 938
the counties of Rockland, Schuyler and Chemung a question of fact was raised by the evidence whether there was a sufficient number of valid signatures for those ' counties respectively, and the Special Term has held on the evidence that the number in each of those counties was insufficient under sections 135 and 137 of the Election Law. The evidence justified the finding of the Special Term. Order unanimously affirmed. Present — Rhodes, Acting P. J., McNamee, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ. [See post, p. 938.]