From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Allgrove v. Canary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 21, 1985
112 A.D.2d 1057 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

August 21, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.).


Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Petitioners claim that the respondent candidates' designating petitions should be invalidated under Election Law §§ 16-102 and 16-116 due to alleged violations of Election Law § 2-126 involving use of party funds in a primary campaign. Petitioners' claim is without merit. It would appear from the wording of Election Law article 16 that the provisions therein were intended by the Legislature to deal exclusively with frauds or irregularities in the actual voting process and were not intended to cover the circumstances herein ( see, Matter of Lisa v. Board of Elections, 54 A.D.2d 746, 747, affd 40 N.Y.2d 911). Therefore, the proceeding was properly dismissed. Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Thompson, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Allgrove v. Canary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 21, 1985
112 A.D.2d 1057 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

Matter of Allgrove v. Canary

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of DONALD C. ALLGROVE et al., Appellants, v. WILLIAM J…

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

Date published: Aug 21, 1985

Citations

112 A.D.2d 1057 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

Colamonico v. Frascone

The Second Department stated that from the wording of article 16, the Legislature intended it "to deal…