AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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

In the Matter of MICHAEL R. RAPP, SR., et al., Appellants, v. MARY A. WRIGHT et al., Respondents.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Westchester County, for a determination of the proceeding on the merits.

Contrary to the determination of the Supreme Court, we conclude that the proceeding was timely commenced. The petitioners established that the petitioner Michael R. Rapp, Sr. commenced the proceeding by order to show cause within three business days of the determination of the respondent Westchester County Board of Elections denying his objections (see, Election Law § 16-102). The respondents' bare conclusory assertion that the determination of the Board of Elections was made at some earlier time is unsupported by any proof in the record (cf., Matter of Eckart v. Edelstein, 185 A.D.2d 955; see also, Matter of Pell v Coveney, 37 N.Y.2d 494).

Inasmuch as the Supreme Court did not rule on the specific objections to the petition, we remit the matter for further proceedings on the merits (see, Matter of Pericak v. Hooper, 207 A.D.2d 950). Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Pizzuto and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF RAPP v. WRIGHT
(Aug 23, 1995)