From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Yevoli v. Cristenfeld

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 7, 1971
29 N.Y.2d 591 (N.Y. 1971)

Summary

In Yevoli the rule was broad enough to cover candidates for judicial office, although the case itself did not specifically present such application.

Summary of this case from Matter of Rosenthal v. Harwood

Opinion

Argued July 6, 1971

Decided July 7, 1971

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, DANIEL G. ALBERT, J.

Alan Manning Miller and Henry W. Schober for appellants.

George C. Pratt and John P. Cleary for intervenors-appellants. Eugene J. McMahon, Louis Orfan and Aaron Britvan for respondents.


Order reversed, without costs, on the dissenting opinion at the Appellate Division, and case remitted to Special Term with directions to grant judgment declaring the rules in question to be constitutionally valid.

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL and GIBSON. Judge JASEN dissents and votes to affirm on the opinion at the Appellate Division.


Summaries of

Matter of Yevoli v. Cristenfeld

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 7, 1971
29 N.Y.2d 591 (N.Y. 1971)

In Yevoli the rule was broad enough to cover candidates for judicial office, although the case itself did not specifically present such application.

Summary of this case from Matter of Rosenthal v. Harwood

In Yevoli (supra) wherein the constitutionality of this by-law was directly in issue, the majority in this court relied to a great extent on Callahan (supra), stating that, if it is unconstitutional for the Legislature to prohibit a multi-party candidacy, it is certainly unconstitutional for party committees to seek the same result through their own rules.

Summary of this case from Matter of Rosenthal v. Harwood
Case details for

Matter of Yevoli v. Cristenfeld

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of LEWIS J. YEVOLI et al., Respondents, v. MARVIN D…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 7, 1971

Citations

29 N.Y.2d 591 (N.Y. 1971)
324 N.Y.S.2d 317
272 N.E.2d 898

Citing Cases

Matter of Rosenthal v. Harwood

2; cf. Blaikie v. Knott, 277 App. Div. 461; Matter of Daniel, 149 App. Div. 777). It may be remarked, in…

Matter of Rosenthal v. Harwood

The Appellate Division reversed the dismissal of the petition. While it agreed that the courts could not…