From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Cosgrove

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 20, 1944
292 N.Y. 115 (N.Y. 1944)

Opinion

Argued January 13, 1944

Decided January 20, 1944

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, MacCRATE, J.

A. David Benjamin and Irving Ginsberg for Thomas F. Cosgrove, appellant.

Irving Rivkin and Jerome Otis Ellis for Thomas J. Walsh, respondent. Ignatius M. Wilkinson, Corporation Counsel ( Thomas W.A. Crowe of counsel), for S. Howard Cohen et al., as Commissioners of Elections of the City of New York, respondents.


The indorsements upon two envelopes of war voters in foreign service were not executed as required by the statute and the votes should have been rejected if objection had been made upon the original canvass (See Election Law, § 319). In the absence of objection the envelopes were opened as provided in the statute and the ballots deposited in the ballot box. We agree with the courts below that the ballots so deposited without objection must be counted. Protest thereafter will not avail even where it may be possible to determine for which candidate such ballot was cast.

The order should be affirmed, without costs.

LEHMAN, Ch. J., LOUGHRAN, RIPPEY, LEWIS, CONWAY, DESMOND and THACHER, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed.


Summaries of

Matter of Cosgrove

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 20, 1944
292 N.Y. 115 (N.Y. 1944)
Case details for

Matter of Cosgrove

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of THOMAS F. COSGROVE, Appellant. THOMAS J. WALSH…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jan 20, 1944

Citations

292 N.Y. 115 (N.Y. 1944)
54 N.E.2d 34

Citing Cases

Matter Progno v. Monroe Co. Elec. Comrs

In other words once the ballot is deposited in the box among others it is doubtful if there could be any…

Matter of Vil. of Purchase

The error complained of was due entirely to an erroneous construction of the controlling statute by the Town…