Legal Opinion · Dissent

MATTER OF CURRY v. Hosley

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 26, 1995Published

1DissentLevine, J.

I respectfully dissent. There have been no fundamental changes in the law nor in the status of Hamilton County since 1963 that warrant a departure from the settled principles of stare decisis.

When we affirmed the denial of a petition to remove a nonlawyer candidate from the ballot for District Attorney in Hamilton County in Matter of Drake v McAfee (13 NY2d 878), there were, according to the Supreme Court decision in that case, six attorneys residing in Hamilton County eligible for the office of District Attorney. Of those six, three were already holding public office. According to the record…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. S & S Hotel Ventures Limited Partnership v. 777 S. H. Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. Schumer v. HoltzmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. Niesig v. Team INew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. MATTER OF DRAKE v. McAfeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1963

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API