Case Name: In the Matter of the Application of Thomas A. Lacey and All Other Persons Similarly Situated Who Join Herein for the Restoration of Their Respective Enrollments upon the Enrollment Blanks Executed by Them in Their Respective Election Districts in the City of Cohoes, N. Y., on Registration Days in October, 1928, and for the Correction of the Records of the Albany County Board of Elections to Correspond with Said Enrollments Actually and Lawfully Made
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1929-09
Citations: 227 A.D. 673
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Application of Thomas A. Lacey and All Other Persons Similarly Situated Who Join Herein for the Restoration of Their Respective Enrollments upon the Enrollment Blanks Executed by Them in Their Respective Election Districts in the City of Cohoes, N. Y., on Registration Days in October, 1928, and for the Correction of the Records of the Albany County Board of Elections to Correspond with Said Enrollments Actually and Lawfully Made.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 227
Pages: 673–673

Head Matter:
Third Department,
September, 1929.
In the Matter of the Application of Thomas A. Lacey and All Other Persons Similarly Situated Who Join Herein for the Restoration of Their Respective Enrollments upon the Enrollment Blanks Executed by Them in Their Respective Election Districts in the City of Cohoes, N. Y., on Registration Days in October, 1928, and for the Correction of the Records of the Albany County Board of Elections to Correspond with Said Enrollments Actually and Lawfully Made.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The motion is granted and stay continued on the ground that the Supreme Court has no inherent common-law powers in an election case, but only such powers as are expressly conferred by the statute. The powers expressly conferred shall be liberally construed but the court cannot assume a power not granted by the Election Law. It is conceded that no express statutory authority has been conferred upon the Supreme Court to deal summarily with the subject-matter of this litigation. The applicants, we think, have slept upon their rights. (Election Law, § 183, 184.) Van Kirk, P. J., Hinman and Whitmyer, JJ., concur; Hill and Hasbrouck, JJ., dissent, each with a memorandum.