From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Quinn v. Erie Cnty. Bd. of Elections

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Aug 20, 2014
120 A.D.3d 992 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-08-20

In the Matter of Michael P. QUINN and Mark W. Kumiega, Petitioners–Respondents, v. ERIE COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS, Dennis E. Ward and Ralph Mohr, as Commissioners, Erie County Board of Elections, Respondents–Appellants, et al., Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Christopher J. Burns, J.), entered August 11, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to Election Law article 16. The order granted the petition to validate a joint designating petition and directed that petitioners be placed on the primary election ballot. Michael A. Siragusa, County Attorney, Buffalo (Jeremy C. Toth of Counsel), for Respondents–Appellants. James Ostrowski, Buffalo, for Petitioners–Respondents.


Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Christopher J. Burns, J.), entered August 11, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to Election Law article 16. The order granted the petition to validate a joint designating petition and directed that petitioners be placed on the primary election ballot.
Michael A. Siragusa, County Attorney, Buffalo (Jeremy C. Toth of Counsel), for Respondents–Appellants. James Ostrowski, Buffalo, for Petitioners–Respondents.
MEMORANDUM:

Petitioners commenced this proceeding seeking to validate their joint designating petition for the position of Erie County Democratic Committee Member, Town of Hamburg, District 11. We conclude that Supreme Court erred in granting the petition, and we therefore reverse the order and dismiss the petition. “Election Law § 6–132(2) requires that each sheet of a designating petition must contain a statement of a subscribing witness which shall be dated and signed by the witness. The date is a matter of prescribed content and therefore strict compliance is required” ( Matter of MacKay v. Cochran, 264 A.D.2d 699, 699–700, 695 N.Y.S.2d 113). Here, it is undisputed that the date of the subscribing witness's authenticating statement on the first sheet of the designating petition is June 7, 2014, i.e., 18 days before the June 25, 2014 date of the signatures collected on that first sheet. It is also undisputed that without the signatures on that first sheet, the designating petition does not contain the requisite number of signatures. Because “all signatures on the petition which [a]re dated after the authenticating statement [are] void” ( Matter of Weiss v. Mahoney, 49 A.D.2d 796, 796, 373 N.Y.S.2d 411; see Matter of Byrnes v. Board of Elections of the County of Nassau, 134 N.Y.S.2d 257, 261, affd. 284 App.Div. 847, 133 N.Y.S.2d 553, affd.307 N.Y. 816, 122 N.E.2d 101), the signatures on the first sheet of the designating petition are void, and respondent Erie County Board of Elections therefore properly rejected the designating petition. Although petitioners could have filed petitioner Mark W. Kumiega's affidavit attesting to his purported mistake on or before the last day provided by law for filing a designating petition, they failed to do so, and Kumiega's affidavit, which accompanied the petition, was therefore “not properly cognizable” by the court ( Matter of Sortino v. Chiavaroli, 59 A.D.2d 644, 644, 398 N.Y.S.2d 385, affd.42 N.Y.2d 982, 398 N.Y.S.2d 415, 368 N.E.2d 37).

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the petition is dismissed. SCUDDER, P.J., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, and WHALEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Quinn v. Erie Cnty. Bd. of Elections

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Aug 20, 2014
120 A.D.3d 992 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Quinn v. Erie Cnty. Bd. of Elections

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Michael P. QUINN and Mark W. Kumiega…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Date published: Aug 20, 2014

Citations

120 A.D.3d 992 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 5911
991 N.Y.S.2d 380

Citing Cases

Boniello v. Niagara Cnty. Bd. of Elections

The page contained nine signatures, and the only writing on the date line was the numeral “9.” Contrary to…

Mitrano v. N.Y. State Bd. of Elections

Such testimony must be "credible and worthy of belief by the court." (Id. citing Matter of Merrill v. Fritz,…