TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Quinn

In the Matter of the Application of William Quinn, Respondent, to Inspect and Examine Ballots Cast for the Office of Town Clerk of the Town of Granville. Evan R. Evans, Appellant

In re Quinn, 115 N.E. 442 (N.Y. 1917)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 27, 1917
Judges
<italic>Per Curiam</italic>.
Citations
115 N.E. 442220 N.Y. 6231917 N.Y. LEXIS 1075
Headnotes
Elections — examination of ballots. Section 374 of the Election Law is broad enough in its terms to entitle any candidate voted for at the time of a general election to an examination as of right in a proper case of any ballots upon which his name lawfully appears as that of a candidate whether the validity of the election is in controversy or not.
Summary
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered October 10, 1916, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion to vacate and set aside a prior order granting to the petitioner permission to examine and inspect the ballots cast at the general election held November 2, 1915, in the town of Granville, upon which his name lawfully appeared.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

*624 Per Curiam.

The order should be affirmed under the provisions of section 314 of the Election Law, which is broad enough in its terms to entitle any candidate voted for at the time of a general election to an examination as of right in a proper case of any ballots upon which his name lawfully appears as that of a candidate whether the validity of the election is in controversy or not. The provisions of section 61 of the Town Law relating to an examination and recount of ballots in case of contests provides a wholly distinct and different remedy.

The order should, be affirmed, with costs.

Hiscock, Oh. J., Chase, Collin, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1918: 21924: 11931: 119182026peak 1918 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Whitman. No. 1121 N.E. 479 (N.Y. 1918) · Concurrence
  2. In re Barrett209 A.D. 217 (1924)
  3. In re Oliver234 A.D. 170 (1931)
  4. In re Whitman185 A.D. 228 (1918)

Most recent

  1. In re Oliver234 A.D. 170 (1931)
  2. In re Barrett209 A.D. 217 (1924)
  3. In re Whitman. No. 1121 N.E. 479 (N.Y. 1918) · Concurrence
  4. In re Whitman185 A.D. 228 (1918)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list