Case Name: In the Matter of John T. McCall, Respondent; Charles A. Muzzicato et al., Appellants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1942-10-08
Citations: 289 N.Y. 104
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of John T. McCall, Respondent; Charles A. Muzzicato et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 289
Pages: 104–107

Head Matter:
In the Matter of John T. McCall, Respondent; Charles A. Muzzicato et al., Appellants.
Argued October 5, 1942;
decided October 8, 1942.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Alfred J. Bohlinger and Frederick T. Paine for Charles A. Muzzicato, appellant.
Muzzicato’s declination of the Senatorial nomination obtained at the primary election as the nominee of the Republican and American Labor Parties was in all respects valid. (Cons. Laws, ch. 17, §§ 319-f, subd. 8, 319-h.) The order appealed from is contrary to the spirit and intent of the State Constitution and the Election Law. (Matter of Ryan v. Murray, 172 Misc. Rep. 105; People v. Purdy, 154 N. Y. 439.)
Philip Jones and Allen Goodwin for Richard A. DiCostanzo et al., appellants.
The declination of the Republican and American Labor Party nomination for State Senator received by Muzzicato at the primary election was permissible. (Cons. Laws, ch. 17, §§ 319-f, subd. 8, 319-h.) The relief sought by petitioner is contrary to the spirit and intent of the Constitution and the Election Law. (Matter of Ryan v. Murray, 172 Misc. Rep. 105; People v. Purdy, 154 N. Y. 439.)
William C. Chanler, Corporation Counsel (H. Broadman Epstein of counsel), for Board of Elections of City of New York.
James B. M. McNally, Nicholas P. Iannuzzi, Nathan B. Gurock, Jacob Markowitz and Edmond Finbar McCarthy for respondent.
The declination is not permitted by the statute. (Cons. Laws, ch. 17, § 319-f, subd. 8; Matter of Clonan, 176 Misc. Rep. 557; Mushlitt v. Silverman, 50 N. Y. 360; Johnson v. Hudson R. R. R. Co., 49 N. Y. 455.)

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Charles A. Muzzicato received the party nomination for State Senator in the primary election of both the Republican and American Labor parties. Subsequently he received the nomination of the Republican party for Representative-at-Large. Thereafter he declined the nomination of both parties for State Senator and the Board of Elections accepted the declination. Petitioner as the candidate of another party thereafter instituted this proceeding contending that under the Election Law the nominee could decline only the party nomination of the Republican party but could not decline the party nomination of the American Labor party.
The Election Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 17) provides in section 319-f, subdivision 8: " A person whose name is printed on the primary ballot of a party, as a candidate for nomination by it to public office, and who is nominated, if such person is thereafter nominated for another office by such party may decline the nomination made at the primary election
Construing the statute in accordance with the mandate of section 319-h, that " the provisions of this article shall be construed liberally for the purposes herein expressed or intended," we reach the conclusion that section 319-f, subdivision 8 authorizes a candidate, in the circumstances herein described, to decline any nomination made at a primary election since. that is the only practicable method by which he can take advantage of the statutory permission to terminate his candidacy for office.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and that of the Special Term affirmed.