Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Louis F. DeCICCO et al., Respondents, v. CHEMUNG COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, Respondent, and Daniel J. CHAPMAN, et al., Appellants.
OPINION OF THE COURT
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.
In this case supporters of John Trice simultaneously circulated a petition designating him as Conservative Party candidate for District Attorney of Chemung County and a petition for an opportunity to ballot for the Conservative nomination for that office. Both petitions contained the same signatures and were executed on the same date. The designating petition was invalidated for failure to receive the required certificate of authorization from the Conservative Party (see, Election Law § 6-120[3] ).
The Appellate Division was correct in ruling that the petition for an opportunity to ballot was also invalid under Election Law § 6-134(3) inasmuch as all of the voters signing that petition had also signed the designating petition on the same date.
Election Law § 6-134(3) provides that if on the same date a voter signs “any petition or petitions designating a greater number of candidates for public office * * * than the number of persons to be elected thereto [the voter's signatures] * * * shall not be counted.” As it is clear that the opportunity to ballot necessarily implies a vote in the primary for someone other than the person named in the designating petition (see, Election Law § 8-308[2] ), the Appellate Division properly relied solely on Section 6-134(3) to invalidate the signatures on the opportunity to ballot petition.
Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.
MEMORANDUM.
Chief Judge KAYE and Judges BELLACOSA, SMITH, LEVINE, CIPARICK, WESLEY and ROSENBLATT concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: August 25, 1999
Court: Court of Appeals of New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)