Case Name: In the Matter of the Application of James J. Walker and Joseph N. Hannon to Review the Determination of the Board of Elections of the City of New York on the Objections of James J. Walker and Joseph N. Hannon to the Certificate of Nomination of John J. Manning for the Office of Member of Assembly in the Fifth Assembly District, New York County
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1909-10
Citations: 134 A.D. 947
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Application of James J. Walker and Joseph N. Hannon to Review the Determination of the Board of Elections of the City of New York on the Objections of James J. Walker and Joseph N. Hannon to the Certificate of Nomination of John J. Manning for the Office of Member of Assembly in the Fifth Assembly District, New York County.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 134
Pages: 947–948

Head Matter:
First Department,
October, 1909.
In the Matter of the Application of James J. Walker and Joseph N. Hannon to Review the Determination of the Board of Elections of the City of New York on the Objections of James J. Walker and Joseph N. Hannon to the Certificate of Nomination of John J. Manning for the Office of Member of Assembly in the Fifth Assembly District, New York County.
Election Law — nomination by petition.
Appeals from orders.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
A careful reading of the order shows that it was the intention of the court that in reciting the defects alleged to have been found in the certificate of nomination the court intended to recite the claims made by the contestants with respect thereto, and did not find that those claims were sustained as a matter of fact. And the conclusion at which it arrived indicates clearly that it did not find as a matter of fact that the objections were sustained. The evidence before us shows that there were some apparent forgeries and irregularities in the petition of nomination, but does not show such facts with sufficient clearness, that such apparent forgeries and irregularities reduced the number of legal nominators below the requisite number, to justify in overruling the board of elections. The order appealed from is, therefore, affirmed. Present — Ingraham, Laughlin, Clarke, Houghton and Scott, JJ. Orders affirmed.