# King v. Board of Elections

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · September 10, 2009 · 65 A.D.3d 1060

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5781901

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of Erlene J. King v. Board of Elections in City of New York
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** September 10, 2009
- **Citations:** 65 A.D.3d 1060; 884 N.Y.S.2d 889
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 3 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/5781901

## Opinion text

In a proceeding, in effect, pursuant to Election Law § 16-104, inter alia, to direct the Board of Elections in the City of New York to include the petitioner’s name as a candidate on absentee ballots in a primary election to be held on September 15, 2009 for the nomination of the Democratic Party as its candidate for the public office of Member of the New York City Council, 45th Council District, and to reprint the absentee ballots, the Board of Elections in the City of New York appeals from a final order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated September 3, 2009, which, among other things, granted the petition and directed it to include the petitioner’s name as a candidate on the subject absentee ballots and to reprint those absentee ballots accordingly.
Ordered that the final order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.
*1061 Under the circumstances of this case, the petition must be denied and the proceeding must be dismissed, as meaningful relief cannot be afforded in accordance with the Election Law (see Election Law § 7-122 [1] [a]; Matter of Hunter v Orange County Bd. of Elections, 11 NY3d 813 [2008]; Matter of Breitenbach v Heffernan, 245 App Div 374 [1935], affd 268 NY 718 [1935]). Skelos, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and Roman, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5781901. Public record. Not legal advice.