From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Gray v. Hochberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 21, 1991
175 A.D.2d 892 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

August 21, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Gurahian, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the proceeding is dismissed.

The petition for an opportunity to ballot was defective because of insufficient signatures (see, Matter of Hochberg v D'Apice, 112 A.D.2d 1067, 1068, affd 65 N.Y.2d 960). In any event, an opportunity to ballot may be afforded where there is a ostensibly viable candidacy nullified by technical challenge, thereby depriving the party's voters of their manifest intent to field a candidate (Matter of Hochberg v D'Apice, supra, at 1068). No such circumstances were present here. Not only was the sole designating petition facially invalid because of the failure to obtain the required minimum number of signatures (see, Matter of Quaglia v Lefever, 143 A.D.2d 238), but, in addition, that petition was never even filed. Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Sullivan and Lawrence, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Gray v. Hochberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 21, 1991
175 A.D.2d 892 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Matter of Gray v. Hochberg

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of STEPHEN Q. GRAY et al., Respondents, v. AUDREY G…

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

Date published: Aug 21, 1991

Citations

175 A.D.2d 892 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
573 N.Y.S.2d 742

Citing Cases

Stevens v. Collins

Contrary to the appellants' further contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its…

Bassolino v. De Grace

Here, the challenged signature on the petition for opportunity to ballot was invalid because the signatory's…