WARNER v. CANARY

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Appellant's contention that the validation proceeding was not timely commenced is without merit in light of the fact that the parties concede that personal service was effected on July 25, 1985, the last date upon which said proceeding could be timely brought ( see, Election Law § 16-102). Moreover, service by mail, as provided for in the order to show cause, was satisfactory under the circumstances herein ( see, Matter of Pell v. Coveney, 37 N.Y.2d 494; Matter of Gartner v. Salerno, 74 A.D.2d 958, lv denied 49 N.Y.2d 704). Additionally, we find no merit in appellant's contention that all the signatures on the designated petition should be held invalid. The two pages of the petition witnessed by petitioner Warner alone contain more than enough signatures to support said petition. Therefore, we need not reach appellant's arguments concerning the alleged invalidity of the signatures witnessed by candidate O'Shea subsequent to his signing of the designating petition of another candidate for the same office. Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Thompson, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.