Case Name: Charles M. Gadsden, Petitioner, v. Board of Elections, Objector. In the Matter of Elaine R. Berlin et al., Respondents, v. Board of Elections of the City of New York, Respondent, and Wilbert Kirby, Appellant; In the Matter of Wilbert Kirby, Appellant, v. Anthony Sadowski et al., Respondents, and Douglas A. Kellner, Respondent. (And Another Proceeding.)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1982-09-16
Citations: 89 A.D.2d 941
Docket Number: 
Parties: Charles M. Gadsden, Petitioner, v Board of Elections, Objector. In the Matter of Elaine R. Berlin et al., Respondents, v Board of Elections of the City of New York, Respondent, and Wilbert Kirby, Appellant. In the Matter of Wilbert Kirby, Appellant, v Anthony Sadowski et al., Respondents, and Douglas A. Kellner, Respondent. (And Another Proceeding.)
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 89
Pages: 941–943

Head Matter:
Charles M. Gadsden, Petitioner, v Board of Elections, Objector. In the Matter of Elaine R. Berlin et al., Respondents, v Board of Elections of the City of New York, Respondent, and Wilbert Kirby, Appellant. In the Matter of Wilbert Kirby, Appellant, v Anthony Sadowski et al., Respondents, and Douglas A. Kellner, Respondent. (And Another Proceeding.)

Opinion:
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (A. Klein, J.), entered on September 3,1982 affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Matter ofWein v Molinari (51 NY2d 717) seems to us dispositive of the issue presented, although we acknowledge possible merit in the distinction urged in the dissenting opinion. We are not persuaded that the record establishes a waiver of the claimed jurisdictional defect. Concur — Sandler, J. P., Asch and Milonas, JJ.