From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Galiber v. Previte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Aug 26, 1976
54 A.D.2d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Opinion

August 26, 1976


Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements, for the reasons given by the referee. (See, also, Election Law, §§ 330, 335; CPLR 4403.) Appellant's oral application for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals is granted.


The respondent-appellant raises several interesting questions which warrant further consideration by the Court of Appeals. If CPLR 4320 (subd [b]) requires the referee to file his report together with a transcript, in the absence of such transcript can the Justice at Special Term confirm the report? (See Aron v Aron, 280 N.Y. 328.) Further, can the summary procedure contemplated by sections 330 and 335 of the Election Law validate the expeditious confirmation without such a transcript? Underlying the legal problem, of course, is the practical fact that in many cases, the time schedule does not allow for a full transcript to be timely prepared. (See Note, 73 Col L Rev 318, "Primary Challenges in New York: Caselaw Coleslaw v. Election Protection; Matter of Silver v. Feuer, 46 A.D.2d 635 [dissent].)" As a result, the final determination may hinge on who has the burden of providing the minutes of the hearing. (See Matter of Mercorella v Benza, 37 N.Y.2d 792, revg 49 A.D.2d 705, on remand 49 A.D.2d 716.) The other legal point is whether the New York State Constitution provision requiring, among other things, that a member of the Legislature must be a resident of the State for five years (art III, § 7), violates the United States Constitution. This court has previously upheld that section. (Matter of Burns v Power, New York County Clerk's Index No. 06950/1964 [Sarafite, J.], affd without opn 21 A.D.2d 753.) However, recent Supreme Court decisions raise questions that seem to indicate (and in my view rightly so, considering some more prominent candidacies) that such a long residence requirement is unreasonable. (See Dunn v Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330; Carrington v Rash, 380 U.S. 89.) Nonetheless, we cannot lightly overturn a New York State constitutional provision. Moreover, the Attorney-General has not been notified. (Cf. CPLR 1012, subd [b].)


Summaries of

Matter of Galiber v. Previte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Aug 26, 1976
54 A.D.2d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)
Case details for

Matter of Galiber v. Previte

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JOSEPH L. GALIBER, Respondent, v. JOSEPH PREVITE et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Aug 26, 1976

Citations

54 A.D.2d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)