Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta In re Baum 268 N.Y. 614

← Cases

In re Baum

268 N.Y. 614 Court N.Y. Decision date 1935-09-09 English

Judges Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ., concur; Crane, Ch. J., votes to affirm in all particulars.

Contents

Majority

p. 614
In the Matter of the Application of Lester Baum, Respondent. George Z. et al., as a Committee to Fill Vacancies, Appellants. In the Matter of the Application of George J. Mintzer et al., Appellants. Morton Baum et al., as a Committee to Fill Vacancies, Respondents. In the Matter of the Application of Rose Isaacs et al., Appellants. Morton Baum et al., as a Committee to Fill Vacancies, Respondents. In the Matter of the Application of William J. Peiper, Jr., Appellant. Morton Baum et al., as a Committee to Fill Vacancies, Respondents,
(Argued September 9, 1935;
decided September 9, 1935.)
p. 616
Charles H. Tuttle, I. Arnold Boss, Max Tachna and Abraham Barnett for appellants.
Frederick F. Greenman, Henry Cohen and Nathan E. Percy for respondents.

The statements of subscribing witnesses to petitions substantially complied with the provisions of section 135 of the Election Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 17), as amended by chapter 955 of the Laws of 1935. This case differs from Matter of Dorsey v. Cohen ( 268 N. Y. 620 ), decided herewith, in that there was no substantial compliance with the statute in the Dorsey case.

The order of the Appellate Division which approved the action of the Election Board in refusing to file such petitions should be reversed and the Election Board directed to file such petitions.

The orders of the Appellate Division in other respects should be affirmed.

p. 617
The orders should be modified in accordance with this memorandum and as so modified affirmed, without costs.

Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ., concur; Crane, Ch. J., votes to affirm in all particulars.

Ordered accordingly.

Cases cited