Case Name: In the Matter of Samuel T. Pirozzolo, Jr., Appellant, v. John Lia et al., Respondents, et al., Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-08-16
Citations: 142 A.D.3d 569
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Samuel T. Pirozzolo, Jr., Appellant, v John Lia et al., Respondents, et al., Respondent.
Judges: Dillon, J.P., Dickerson, Cohen and Duffy, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 142
Pages: 569–570

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Samuel T. Pirozzolo, Jr., Appellant, v John Lia et al., Respondents, et al., Respondent.
[36 NYS3d 821]

Opinion:
In a proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16-102, inter alia, to invalidate petitions designating John Lia, Lynne R. Galdamez, Gregory Fasano, Julie Kim, Thomas J. Wonica, Angelyn C. Wonica, and Thomas L. Raguci as candidates in a primary election to be held on September 13, 2016, for the party positions of Members of the County Committee of the Conservative Party, Richmond County, for certain Election Districts within the 63rd Assembly District, the petitioner appeals from a final order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Greene, J.), dated August 10, 2016, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
Ordered that the final order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding on the ground that the petitioner lacked standing to challenge the subject designating petitions, as the petitioner was not enrolled to vote in any of the election districts in which the challenged candidates resided (see Election Law § 6-154 [2]; Lucariello v Niebel, 72 NY2d 927, 928 [1988]; Matter of Luthmann v Gulino, 131 AD3d 636, 637 [2015]; Matter of Dekom v Trani, 109 AD3d 769, 770 [2013]; Matter of Haggerty v Board of Elections of City of N.Y., 218 AD2d 773 [1995]; Matter of Cantatore v Sunderland, 196 AD2d 606, 607 [1993]). The petitioner's challenge to the constitutionality of Election Law § 6-154 (2), as interpreted by the Court of Appeals in Lucariello v Niebel (72 NY2d 927 [1988]), is without merit.
The parties' remaining contentions need not be addressed in light of our determination.
Dillon, J.P., Dickerson, Cohen and Duffy, JJ., concur.