Case Name: William J. Schieffelin, Appellant, v. J. Gabriel Britt et al., Constituting the Board of Elections of the City of New York et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1912-10-15
Citations: 206 N.Y. 677
Docket Number: 
Parties: William J. Schieffelin, Appellant, v. J. Gabriel Britt et al., Constituting the Board of Elections of the City of New York et al., Respondents.
Judges: Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Haight, Vann, Willard Bartlett, Chase and Collin, JJ. Not sitting: Hisgock, J.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 206
Pages: 677–678

Head Matter:
William J. Schieffelin, Appellant, v. J. Gabriel Britt et al., Constituting the Board of Elections of the City of New York et al., Respondents.
(Argued September 30, 1912;
decided October 15, 1912.)
Schieffelin v. Britt, 150 App. Div. 568, affirmed.
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 3, 1912, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying an application for an order prohibiting the defendant board of elections from preparing ballots for a primary election with the emblem of the Citizens’ Union thereon.
The following questions were certified:
“1. Has a faction of a political party the right to appropriate and use, in order to identify itself and its candidates to the voters at the official primary, the political emblem of a continuing independent body, which emblem has been duly adopted and exclusively used by such independent body for a considerable period of years to identify itself and its candidates to the voters at the secondary elections, and which emblem such independent body intends to use further in the same manner, such use by the party faction being duly protested against by the . independent body ?
“2. Under such circumstances, has the Supreme Court the power to enjoin such a use of such an emblem in a summary proceeding brought under the Election Law ?
“ 3. Does the record herein disclose a right in the plaintiff to prevent in a proceeding like this the use of the Citizens’ Union emblem by a party faction upon the primary ballot ? ”
Albert 8. Bard and Julius Henry Cohen for appellant.
Archibald R. Watson, Corporation Counsel (Terence Farley of counsel), and Charles W. Coleman for respondents.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, with costs, third question certified answered in the negative, other questions certified not answered; no opinion. '
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Haight, Vann, Willard Bartlett, Chase and Collin, JJ. Not sitting: Hisgock, J.