General
In the Matter of Anthony Futia, Respondent, et al., Petitioner, v. Westchester County Board of Elections, Respondent, and William H. McClure et al., Appellants
307 A.D.2d 1055763 N.Y.S.2d 781·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2003·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 Anthony Futia, Respondent, et al., Petitioner, v Westchester County Board of Elections, Respondent, and William H. McClure et al., Appellants.
[763 NYS2d 781]
[MAJORITY]
In a proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16-102, inter alia, to invalidate a certificate of authorization designating William H. McClure as a candidate in a primary election to be held on September 9, 2003, for the nomination of the Democratic Party as its candidate for the public office of Member of the Town Council of the Town of North Castle, the appeal is from a final order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Smith, J.), entered August 12, 2003, which, after a hearing, granted the petition and invalidated the certificate of authorization.
Ordered that the final order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
At a meeting held on April 10, 2003, the Democratic Committee of the Town of North Castle (hereinafter the Committee) voted to amend a provision of the rules of the Town’s Democratic Party (hereinafter the Party Rules) requiring notification of special meetings by mail, to permit notification by e-mail. However, the seven Committee members present at the meeting did not constitute a quorum under the Party Rules, and the vote in favor of permitting notice by e-mail was therefore ineffectual. Accordingly, the notice of a meeting held in July 2003, provided solely by e-mail, was insufficient under the Party Rules in place at the time of the later meeting. Under those circumstances, the Supreme Court properly concluded that any action taken at the July 2003 meeting, including any action taken with respect to the candidate William H. McClure, was invalid (see Israel v Matthews, 171 AD2d 896, 898 [1991]; Matter of Bachmann v DeFronzo, 164 AD2d 926, 929 [1990]).
The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J.P., McGinity, Crane, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.