Ingersoll v. Curran
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBooksteih, J.
The proceeding is in the nature of mandamus. The petitioner asserts that the Wilson-Pakula Law (L. 1947, ch. 432) is unconstitutional and seeks to compel the respondent, the Secretary of State, to discharge his official duties, as though it had not been enacted. The allegations of fact in the petition are accepted as true as no answer has been interposed and the respondent moves to dismiss the petition.
While the petition states that the petitioner is not an enrolled member of the Democratic Party, the petition has been amended to allege specifically that he is an enrolled member of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Matter of CallahanNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
3Cited by8 opinions
- MATTER OF MASTER v. PohankaNew York Court of Appeals · 2008
- Stevenson v. GilfertSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1953
- Jokinen v. AllenNew York Supreme Court · 1958
- Ingersoll v. HeffernanNew York Supreme Court · 1947
- Hanofee v. Board of ElectionsNew York Supreme Court · 1965
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.