Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as cross-appealed from, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
Ordered that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the petition is denied in its entirety.
It is well settled that, in the absence of unfair and prejudicial circumstances (see, Matter of Battista v. Power, 16 N.Y.2d 198), Election Law § 7-104 denies an independent row to a candidate who already appears on the ballot as the candidate of at least two major parties (Matter of LaValle v. Canary, 123 A.D.2d 730; see also, Matter of Doyle v. Coveney, 97 A.D.2d 527). The unfairness and prejudice must be of such character as to deprive an independent body of proper representation on the voting machine or otherwise make it practically impossible for the members of that group to vote as such (Matter of Battista v Power, supra, at 201). We find that no such unfairness and prejudice exist here (see, Matter of Kiley v. Coveney, 84 A.D.2d 585, affd 55 N.Y.2d 866). Thompson, J.P., Brown, Eiber and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.