"The parties are best situated to define the proper constituencies of their nominating delegates, and these determinations should not be invalidated unless ... [the process is] utilized to exclude or disadvantage discrete groups or minorities.”
How later courts described this case
- "The parties are best situated to define the proper constituencies of their nominating delegates, and these determinations should not be invalidated unless ... [the process is] utilized to exclude or disadvantage discrete groups or minorities.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Questioned by Di Rosa v. Dodd, 514 F. Supp. 258 (1981)
There is obviously a question whether this rule will survive in light of the Supreme Court’s holding in Democratic Party v. LaFollette, - U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 1010, 67 L.Ed.2d 82 (1981) and the Second Circuit’s ruling in Mrazak v. Suffolk County Board of Elections, 630 F.2d 890 (2d Cir. 1980).3 Regardless, this court will not address the continued validity of Seergy and Montano because certain procedural problems preclu…
The opinion
LUMBARD, Circuit Judge
(concurring):
I would affirm the dismissal of the complaint, substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Weinstein’s opinion, 471 F.Supp. 412 (E.D.N.Y.1979).