Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
In the Matter of the Application of James J. Kehoe, Respondent, to Review the Determination of the Board of Elections of the City of New York. Harry A. Hanbury, Appellant, 1904 — 180 N.Y. 519 · caselaw · US
General
In the Matter of the Application of James J. Kehoe, Respondent, to Review the Determination of the Board of Elections of the City of New York. Harry A. Hanbury, Appellant
180 N.Y. 519·New York Court of Appeals·1904·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
In the Matter of the Application of James J. Kehoe, Respondent, to Review the Determination of the Board of Elections of the City of New York. Harry A. Hanbury, Appellant.
Matter of Kehoe, 97 App. Div. 637, appeal dismissed.
(Argued December 6, 1904;
decided December 30, 1904.)
Appeal from. an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered October 27, 1904, which affirmed an order of Special Term vacating and setting aside a determination of the board of elections of the city of New York refusing to receive and file petitioner’s certificate of nomination as candidate of the Democratic party for the office of state senator for the fifth senatorial district, and directing said board to receive and file said certificate.
William, N. Cohen and Frederick B. Woodruff for appellant.
Frederic R. Coudert and Luke D. Stapleton for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal dismissed on authority of Matter of Norton (158 N. Y. 130), without costs.
Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, O’Brien, . Bartlett, Haight, Martin and Vann, JJ.