Case Name: In the Matter of the Application of William A. De Groot, Appellant, for a Writ of Mandamus to the Board of County Canvassers of the County of Queens, Requiring a Recount of the Votes on Ballots Objected to as Marked for Identification, and a Count of Ballots Rejected by the Inspectors of Election as Void, upon a Recount of Such Votes, in Certain Election Districts in the County of Queens, at the Election Held on the 2d day of November, 1909. James F. McLaughlin, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1909-12
Citations: 136 A.D. 899
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Application of William A. De Groot, Appellant, for a Writ of Mandamus to the Board of County Canvassers of the County of Queens, Requiring a Recount of the Votes on Ballots Objected to as Marked for Identification, and a Count of Ballots Rejected by the Inspectors of Election as Void, upon a Recount of Such Votes, in Certain Election Districts in the County of Queens, at the Election Held on the 2d day of November, 1909. James F. McLaughlin, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 136
Pages: 899–900

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Application of William A. De Groot, Appellant, for a Writ of Mandamus to the Board of County Canvassers of the County of Queens, Requiring a Recount of the Votes on Ballots Objected to as Marked for Identification, and a Count of Ballots Rejected by the Inspectors of Election as Void, upon a Recount of Such Votes, in Certain Election Districts in the County of Queens, at the Election Held on the 2d day of November, 1909. James F. McLaughlin, Respondent.

Opinion:
Order of the Special Term modified in the following particulars: Ballot Exhibit Mo. 20 is a void ballot and should not have been counted for James McLaughlin. Ballot Exhibit Mo. 36 is a void ballot and should not have been counted for William A. De Groot. Ballot Exhibit, Mo. 29 is a void ballot and should not have been counted for James F. McLaughlin. Ballot Exhibit No. 42is a void ballot and should not have been counted for James F. McLaughlin. The order, in so far as it is appealed from, as so modified,should be affirmed, without costs to either party, and. a recount had in accordance with this decision. Hirschberg, P. J., Woodward, Burr, Thomas and Rich, JJ., concurred.