It would seem that the removal of the petitioner was illegal; that the two directors, Moller and Bayles, elected June fifth, were improperly elected; and that the action of the nominating committee was improper, there being no directors qualified to act as such nominating committee, so that on the merits there would have been sufficient evidence to have justified the Special Term judge in either granting the application for mandamus, or taking further proof of the facts, provided the petitioner was not guilty of laches in presenting his application. In Matter of Ringler Co. ( 204 N.Y. 30) it appears that the Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division which had held, in an opinion ( 145 App. Div. 361), that the petitioner was estopped from contesting the election of the directors sought to be removed, and by so doing held that the petitioner was not estopped from contesting the election of the directors. In this Ringler matter a year and a half had elapsed after the election before the proceeding was commenced.