From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Cannuscio v. Garfinkle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 20, 2003
307 A.D.2d 1003 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2003-07049

Argued August 19, 2003.

August 20, 2003.

In a proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16-102, inter alia, to validate a petition designating Vincent Cannuscio as a candidate in a primary election to be held on September 9, 2003, for the nomination of the Republican Party as its candidate for the public office of Supervisor of the Town of Southampton, the appeal is from a final order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Dunn, J.), dated August 11, 2003, which, after a hearing, granted the petition and validated the designating petition.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, BARRY A. COZIER, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the final order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court correctly determined that service of process was proper pursuant to CPLR 308(2) ( see Bossuk v. Steinberg, 58 N.Y.2d 916, 918).

ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN, COZIER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Cannuscio v. Garfinkle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 20, 2003
307 A.D.2d 1003 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

In the Matter of Cannuscio v. Garfinkle

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF VINCENT CANNUSCIO, petitioner-respondent, v. ROBERT L…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Aug 20, 2003

Citations

307 A.D.2d 1003 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
763 N.Y.S.2d 513

Citing Cases

Montes Amaya v. Board of Election

Ordered that the final order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Service of process was properly…