Opinion
August 30, 1985
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Blyn, J.).
These matters were remanded to us by the Court of Appeals for further findings. We find, based on the special referee's report, to the extent confirmed by Special Term, and to the extent reflected in the minutes, that the proceeding against Del Toro was properly instituted. The number of signatures submitted to the Board of Elections by Del Toro and Erazo was substantially in excess of the number required by law. With respect to Del Toro no objection was made to any specific signatures. The major basis for invalidating the petitions was the failure to append to the several volumes thereof cover sheets which strictly complied with the requirements of Election Law § 6-134 (2). We find the cover page rule to be inapplicable to the circumstances presented to us because the cover page errors are insubstantial. ( Matter of Franco v. Velez, 112 A.D.2d 875, affd 65 N.Y.2d 967; Matter of Staber v. Fidler, 65 N.Y.2d 529; Matter of Steere v. Mason, 112 A.D.2d 881.) With respect to mispagination, we held in Matter of Farrell v. Morgan ( 112 A.D.2d 882, 883) that "[a]bsent some indication that the gaps [in pagination] are the result of some fraudulent act, it is manifestly unfair to penalize the signatories who, after all, have the greatest stake in the proper operation of the democratic process, for these occasional aberrations." We adhere to that holding in this case.
Accordingly, we find the designating petitions to be valid designating petitions and that the motions to invalidate them were improperly granted.
Concur — Bloom, J.P., Fein, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.