Opinion
August 23, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Slavin, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The designating petition herein was correctly invalidated as it failed to set forth the total number of pages and the total number of signatures contained therein as required by Election Law § 6-134 (2) (see, Matter of Ruiz v. Saez, 68 N.Y.2d 154; Matter of Pecoraro v. Mahoney, 65 N.Y.2d 1026; Matter of Sealy v Vann, 122 A.D.2d 919; Matter of Sansivieri v. Board of Elections, 122 A.D.2d 918). Moreover, we reject the appellants' contention that Election Law § 6-134 (9) is applicable to the instant case as that provision concerns inadvertent overstatements and understatements of the number of signatures contained on a designating petition and does not apply to situations such as those present at bar where the number is omitted altogether. Kunzeman, J.P., Eiber, Spatt, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.