AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

IN THE MATTER OF JACK R. ESSENBERG, ETC., APPELLANT, v. TAMMY A. REAPE, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly concluded that the instant proceeding was subject to the 10-day period of limitations set forth in Election Law § 16-102(2). Since the instant proceeding was commenced after that period expired, it was untimely (see, Matter of Stabile v. DeFronzo, 231 A.D.2d 577; Matter of Curcio v. Kelly, 193 A.D.2d 738).

We further note that the petitioner should have commenced this proceeding in Jefferson County where this election controversy arose (see, Matter of Lucchese v. Rotella, 60 N.Y.2d 815; Matter of Doyle v. Supreme Court of State of N.Y., 286 App. Div. 469).

S. MILLER, J.P., FRIEDMANN, FLORIO and SMITH, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF ESSENBERG v. REAPE
(May 22, 2000)