The opinion
Pineda v Colon
2025 NY Slip Op 31506(U)
April 28, 2025
Supreme Court, New York County
Docket Number: Index No. 154816/2025
Judge: Jeffrey H. Pearlman
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
State and local government sources, including the New
York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
publication.
INDEX NO. 154816/2025
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/28/2025
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
NEW YORK COUNTY
PRESENT: HON. JEFFREY H. PEARLMAN PART 44M
Justice
--------------X INDEX NO. 154816/2025
ALEXANDER LORENZO REYES PINEDA, TOMAS
RAMOS MOTION DATE 04/14/2025
Petitioner, MOTION SEQ. NO. 001
- V -
FEDERICO COLON, BOARD OF ELECTIONS IN THE CITY DECISION + ORDER ON
OF NEW YORK, MOTION
Respondent.
---------------------.X
The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11
were read on this motion to/for ELECTION LAW- INVALIDATE PETITION
In this Election Law proceeding, Petitioner-objector Alexander Lorenzo Reyes Pineda and
Petitioner-Objector Tomas Ramos (collectively, Petitioner-Objectors) move by Order to Show
Cause for an order finding the Designating Petition of the Respondent-candidate Federico Colon
(Respondent-Candidate) as candidate of the Democratic party for the public office of Member of
the New York City Council from the 8th Council District in the Primary Election to be held on
June 24, 2025 to be invalid and declaring the designating petition filed with Respondent Board of
Elections in the City of New York (Respondent Board of Elections) purporting to designate
Respondent-candidate as candidate for the above public office on the official ballots to be used at
the Primary Election to be held on June 24, 2025 to be a legal nullity, reversing any contrary
determination of Respondent Board of Elections that have been made or may hereinafter be
made (Motion Seq. 001). This memorandum decision is limited to addressing Petitioner -
154816/2025 REYES PINEDA, ALEXANDER LORENZO ET AL vs. COLON, FEDERICO ET AL Page 1 of 5
Motion No. 001
1 of 5
[* 1]
INDEX NO. 154816/2025
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/28/2025
Objectors' claim that "signatures have been forged and/or other fraud has been committed"
(Verified Petition, ~15( q); 4/25/25 Oral Argument).
CPLR § 3016(b) requires that fraud be plead with specificity, and this requirement applies to all
Election Law Proceedings (Thomas v Eugene, 41 Misc3d 418 [Supreme Court, Kings Co. 2013];
Matter of Robinson v Edwards (54 AD3d 682 [2d Dept 2008]). While an "unassailable proof of
fraud" is not required, there needs to be sufficient facts to apprise the candidate of the allegations
being made against the designating petition (Matter of Robinson (54 AD3d 682). This is
precisely why the 2025 Election Law Part Rules for New York County contains a requirement
for a party alleging fraud to present a complete written offer of proof, "including a statement as
to the number of witnesses expected to be called, the identification of each such witness (by
name, address, volume, page and line) and the status of each such witness (e.g., candidate,
signatory, subscribing witness, notary public, etc.)" (2025 New York County Election Law Part
Rules, https://www.nycourts.gov/legacypdfs/courts/1jd/supctmanh/PDF/NYCounty-Election-
PartRules2025.pdf).
Petitioner-Objectors did not present a complete written offer of proof as required by the 2025
New York County Election Law Part Rules. Petitioner-Objectors argue that the written
Objections and Specifications of Objections to the Respondent-Candidate's Designating Petition
filed with the Respondent Board of Elections on April 7, 2025 and April 14, 2025 pursuant to
Election Law § 6-154, which are to be incorporated with the Verified Petition and considered in
support of the request for relief (Verified Petition~~ 6, 7), is sufficient proof of claims of fraud.
The Objections and Specifications of Objections to the Respondent-Candidate's Designating
154816/2025 REYES PINEDA, ALEXANDER LORENZO ET AL vs. COLON, FEDERICO ET AL Page 2 of 5
Motion No. 001
2 of 5
[* 2]
INDEX NO. 154816/2025
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/28/2025
Petition claimed filed with the Respondent Board of Elections by Petitioner-Objectors, however,
are not annexed to the Petition or the Order to Show Cause and were not presented to the Court
at Oral Argument (NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 1, 3, 5).
Respondent-Candidate correctly argues in his Affirmation in Opposition that Petitioner-
Objectors cannot cure their deficient pleadings with the attempted filing and serving of a Bill of
Particulars because the fraud claims alleged therein alleged are also vague and contain
insufficient detail to apprise Respondent-Candidate of the allegations made against his
designating petition (Affirmation in Opposition).
This Court agrees. CPLR § 402 limits pleadings in a special proceeding to a petition, an answer,
and a reply to any counterclaim asserted unless the Court permits the submission of other
pleadings. The 2025 Election Law Part Rules for New York County specifically permits only an
aggrieved candidate to file a Bill of Particulars (2025 New York County Election Law Part
Rules). The reason for this limitation is because the non-candidate objector, as part of these
proceedings, already had the opportunity to file both general and specific objections with the
Board of Elections and should not be given additional time to plead their claim of fraud,
especially in light of this Part's additional requirement that any party alleging fraud present a
complete written offer of proof prior to the return date of these proceedings (id.), which
Petitioner-Objectors did not do.
As Petitioner-Objectors claim of fraud is pied insufficiently, the claim of fraud alleged in the
Petition must be, and is, dismissed (Matter of Waugh v Nowicki, 10 AD3d 437 [2d Dept 2004];
154816/2025 REYES PINEDA, ALEXANDER LORENZO ET AL vs. COLON, FEDERICO ET AL Page 3 of 5
Motion No. 001
3 of 5
[* 3]
INDEX NO. 154816/2025
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/28/2025
Green v Mahr, 231 AD2d 480 [2d Dept 1996]; Ford v D'Apice, 133 AD2d 191 [2d Dept 1987],
Bradley v D'Apice, 91 AD2d 691 [2d Dept 1982]).
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the portion of Petitioner-Objectors Order To Show Cause seeking to invalidate
the Designating Petition of the Respondent-candidate Federico Colon as candidate of the
Democratic party for the public office of Member of the New York City Council from the 8th
Council District in the Primary Election to be held on June 24, 2025 and declare said designating
petition a legal nullity based on the claim that "signatures have been forged and/or other fraud
has been committed" (Verified Petition, ~15( q); is denied and the claim dismissed for failure to
plead fraud with particularity pursuant to CPLR 3016(b); and it is further
ORDERED Counsel for the parties are directed to appear in the Election Law Part (IAS Part
44), New York State Supreme Court, Room 321, 60 Centre Street New York, New York, 10007
at 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday April 29, 2025 to.provide updates to the Court as to status of all
outstanding Board of Elections Rulings and for assignment, as necessary, to a Special Referee
for resolution of any outstanding issues.
154816/2025 REYES PINEDA, ALEXANDER LORENZO ET AL vs. COLON, FEDERICO ET AL Page 4 of 5
Motion No. 001
4 of 5
[* 4]
INDEX NO. 154816/2025
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/28/2025
This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court
4/28/2025
DATE
CHECK ONE: CASE DISPOSED
GRANTED 0 DENIED
APPLICATION: SETTLE ORDER SUBMIT ORDER
□
CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT REFERENCE
154816/2025 REYES PINEDA, ALEXANDER LORENZO ET AL vs. COLON, FEDERICO ET AL Page 5 of 5
Motion No. 001
5 of 5
[* 5]