Legal Opinion

In re Wood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 24, 1936PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

The subscribing witness, instead of giving his residence as the place from which he last registered, has given *323the address of the place of registry. This is not a substantial compliance with section 135 of the Election Law. The defect is not cured merely because his residence may be ascertained through an examination of the records made at the place of registry. Variations from and exceptions to a statute of this kind lead to confusion and disorder and should not be encouraged, especially at times when the election machinery is so very heavily loaded.

We understand that in Matter of Baum and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Matter of BaumNew York Court of Appeals · 1935

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Foote v. LeeNew York Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Goldstein v. FentonNew York Supreme Court · 1952
  3. In re BrickmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API