Case ID: nys_96/html/0147-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(108 App. Div. 108)
    In re WALSH et al.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    November 2, 1905.)
    Elections—Nominations—Certificate—Determination of Election Board-Review.
    In the absence of the filing with the election board of written objections to a certificate of nomination of a candidate to an office, as required by the express provisions of Election Law, Laws 1896, p. 930, c. 909, § 65, there is nothing for the court to review.
    Appeal from Special Term.
    Petition by Edward J. Walsh and another to review the action of the board of elections of the city of New York in determining objections to petitions for nominations of candidates to public office. From an order denying the petition, the petitioners appeal.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before O’BRIEN, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, PATTERSON, CLARKE, and LAUGHLIN, JJ.
    Henry W. Taft, for appellants.
    Theodore Connoly, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

No written objections were filed with the election board, as provided in section 65 of the election law (Laws 1896, p. 930, c. 909). The power of the Supreme Court or a judge thereof is limited to a review of the determination of the board of election. There having been no determination, there is nothing to review.

The order should be affirmed.