Legal Opinion

MATTER OF THOMPSON v. Wallace

New York Court of Appeals

Decided September 1, 1978PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

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 NY2d 827, 828, with Matter of Pell v Coveney, 37 NY2d 494). Petitioner’s assertion that he may avoid the 14-day statutory limitation because he is a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pell v. CoveneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. Bruno v. PeyserNew York Court of Appeals · 1976

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Zaretski v. TutunjianAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  2. Blenman v. HerronNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  3. Bessinger v. MahoneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  4. Stoppenbach v. GoldsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  5. Augustine v. D'ApiceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API