Legal Opinion · Dissent
McHugh v. Comella
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided August 22, 2003Published
1DissentSpain, J.
Because Supreme Court’s determination — that respondent Ann M. Comella (hereinafter respondent) is chargeable with knowledge of the fraud contained on page 1 of the designating petition, which she signed as subscribing witness, and that her petition must be invalidated as a result — is amply supported in the record, I respectfully dissent (see Matter of Leonard v Pradhan, 286 AD2d 459 [2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 718 [2001]; Matter of Buchanan v Espada, 230 AD2d 676, 679 [1996], affd 88 NY2d 973 [1996]; Matter of MacDougall v Board of Elections of City of N.Y., 133 AD2d 198 [1987]; Matter of…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Congregation Yetev Lev D'Satmar, Inc. v. County of SullivanNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Proskin v. MayNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Flower v. D'ApiceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- MATTER OF HASKELL v. GargiuloNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- MacDougall v. Board of ElectionsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.