Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
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)

In the Matter of ABRAHAM THOMPSON, Appellant, v. THOMAS W. WALLACE, as Executi

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as petitioner is an objector to respondent's designating petition, rather than the candidate against whose petition the objections were filed, petitioner's failure to commence this proceeding to invalidate the designating petitions within the 14-day period (Election Law, § 16-102, subd 2) is fatal (compare Matter of Bruno v Peyser, 40 N.Y.2d 827, 828, with Matter of Pell v Coveney, 37 N.Y.2d 494). Petitioner's assertion that he may avoid the 14-day statutory limitation because he is a candidate for the same office as respondent is untenable (see Matter of Pell v Coveney, supra). Since it was petitioner who objected to the designating petition, he was obligated to commence this proceeding within the statutory time period, irrespective of any determination by the Board of Elections.

Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF THOMPSON v. WALLACE
(Sep 1, 1978)