Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Sheldon v. Sperber 45 N.Y.2d 788

← Cases

Sheldon v. Sperber

45 N.Y.2d 788 Court N.Y. Decision date 1978-09-01 English

Contents

Majority

p. 788
In the Matter of Seymour Sheldon et al., Respondents, v S. Seymour Sperber et al., Appellants, et al., Respondents.
Argued August 30,1978;
decided September 1, 1978
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Milton E. Jacobowitz for appellants.
Sidney Baumgarten and Maurice Chayt for respondents.
p. 789
OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order affirmed, without costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division.

The unsworn statement of a subscribing witness to a designating petition is a formal act requiring compliance with prescribed statutory procedure. Section 6-132 of the Election Law mandates that, preceding his or her signature, a subscribing witness state his or her name, party enrollment, residence, election district, ward or assembly district, city or town, county, the number of signatures witnessed and the date. The addition of this information subsequent to the signature of the subscribing witness by another in the witness’ absence is a nullity, rendering the witnessed signatures invalid. (E.g., Matter of Anderson v Power, 1 AD2d 603 , affd 1 NY2d 868 .)

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.

Cases cited

Statutes and regulations cited