Opinion
August 25, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Di Tucci, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
We reject the petitioner's claim that in this case the fraudulent activities attributable to one person soliciting signatures for the candidate is sufficient to show, as a matter of law, that the entire designating petition is permeated with fraud (see, Matter of Ferraro v. McNab, 60 N.Y.2d 601, 603; Matter of Del Pellegrino v. Giuliani, 153 A.D.2d 724, 725; Matter of Lundine v. Hirschfeld, 122 A.D.2d 977, 979-980), especially where, as here, the candidate was found not to have personally participated in the fraud (cf., Matter of Rodriguez v. Izzo, 51 N.Y.2d 747; Matter of MacDougall v. Board of Elections, 133 A.D.2d 198; Matter of Villafane v. Caban, 104 A.D.2d 579). Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Miller, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.