TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Medbury

In the Matter of the Application of Jay Medbury, for Examination of Ballots under the Election Law

In re Medbury, 234 A.D. 26 (1931)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
December 4, 1931
Citations
234 A.D. 26254 N.Y.S. 1221931 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8283

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam.

Under subdivision 4 of section 330 of the Election Law (as amd. by Laws of 1926, chap. 237) an inspection of protested, wholly blank or void ballots may be directed, together with the recanvass or the correction of any error in the canvass in respect of those ballots. Subdivision 5 of the same section (as amd. by Laws of 1928, chap. 363) deals only with the canvass of returns made by inspectors of election or with the canvass of the returns *27 made by inferior boards of canvassers. This section furnishes no authority for a hearing to open ballot boxes or to inspect or recount the ballots contained in the boxes. Section 333 of the Election Law permits the granting of an order to inspect any ballot, thus requiring an opening of the ballot boxes. The sole purpose of the inspection is stated in the section to be for “ the preservation of any ballots in view of a prospective contest.” This section does not justify a change in the original returns made by the inspectors of election on election night to reflect the result of a recount made at the time of the inspection of the ballots. Neither does it justify a recount of the ballots in the boxes for the purpose of a new and different return.

All concur.

Motion for stay pending determination of appeal from order directing the board of town canvassers to open ballot boxes granted, with ten dollars costs.

How later courts describe this case

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

1933: 11935: 11936: 11964: 119332026peak 1933 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Flanagan158 Misc. 295 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1935)
  2. In re Hall157 Misc. 768 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1936)
  3. In re Friedman238 A.D. 341 (1933)
  4. Narel v. Kerr22 A.D.2d 979 (1964)

Most recent

  1. Narel v. Kerr22 A.D.2d 979 (1964)
  2. In re Hall157 Misc. 768 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1936)
  3. In re Flanagan158 Misc. 295 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1935)
  4. In re Friedman238 A.D. 341 (1933)

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