Ruiz v. McKenna
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum. While the many irregularities shown to have occurred might well have supported an inference either that there was a fraudulent intent which infected the petition or that irregularities similar to those proved permeated the whole designating petition, we cannot hold on this record that either inference was compelled as a matter of law. Whether to draw the inference is usually a question of fact (see Matter of Mercorella v Benza, 37 NY2d 792; but cf. Matter of Lerner v Power, 22 NY2d 767) which has been resolved in each instance in respondent’s favor by the Board of Elections, the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mercorella v. BenzaNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Lerner v. PowerNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
3Cited by16 opinions
- Buchanan v. EspadaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Hargett v. GreenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Pilat v. SachsNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Brown v. PhillipsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Quinones v. BassNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.