# Barret v. Scaringe

> New York Court of Appeals · August 28, 1985 · 65 N.Y. 946

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5478472

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of H. Richard Barrett v. George P. Scaringe, Constituting the Albany County Board of Elections, Respondents In the Matter of Fernando Ferrer v. Orlando Velez, Constituting the Board of Elections of the City of New York, Respondents In the Matter of Dave Fromson v. Sandra Lefever, Constituting the Rockland County Board of Elections, Respondents In the Matter of Carol A. Siwek v. Edward J. Mahoney, Constituting the Board of Elections of the County of Erie
- **Court:** New York Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** August 28, 1985
- **Citations:** 65 N.Y. 946
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5478472

## Opinion text

OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The orders of the Appellate Divisions should be affirmed, without costs.
The common issue presented by these four appeals is whether the designating petition of a candidate, seeking party nomination for public office, should be invalidated on the ground that the petition cover sheet slightly understated the total number of *949 signatures actually contained in the petition. This court, under circumstances closely analogous to those herein presented, has held an understatement of signatures to have constituted an inconsequential error which did not warrant invalidation of the designating petition. (Matter of Jonas v Black, 63 NY2d 685 , affg 104 AD2d 466 .) Accordingly, the petitions herein at issue satisfy the requirements of Election Law § 6-134 (2). (See, Matter of Garrett v Alter, 65 NY2d 529 .)
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone concur.
In each case: Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5478472. Public record. Not legal advice.