AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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
Judges

In the Matter of JULIUS H. HINTZ, Appellant, v. BOARD OF ELECTIONS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents.

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

Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the Supreme Court properly dismissed the proceeding. The petitioner, who was enrolled to vote in the 46th Election District, lacked standing to challenge the designating petitions with respect to all the candidates except the two candidates from the 46th Election District (see, Election Law § 6-154; Lucariello v. Niebel, 72 N.Y.2d 927, 928; Matter of Cantatore v. Sunderland, 196 A.D.2d 606, 607). However, the petitioner failed to raise a substantive challenge to the listed candidates from the 46th Election District.

The petitioner's claim of fraud is without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Altman, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF HINTZ v. BOARD OF ELECTIONS
(Aug 23, 1995)