# MATTER OF PLUNKETT v. Mahoney

> New York Court of Appeals · August 30, 1990 · 76 N.Y.2d 848

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9788125

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of John M. Plunkett, Appellant-Respondent, v. Edward J. Mahoney Et Al., Constituting the Board of Elections of the County of Erie, Respondents, and Vincent J. Sorrentino, as Chairman of the Erie County Democratic Party, Et Al., Respondents-Appellants
- **Court:** New York Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** August 30, 1990
- **Citations:** 76 N.Y.2d 848
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Hancock
- **Cited by:** 17 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/9788125

## Opinion text

*850 OPINION OF THE COURT
Order modified, without costs, by denying the cross petition for the reasons stated in the dissenting in part memorandum by Justices Boomer and Lowery at the Appellate Division (— AD2d —) and, as so modified, affirmed. We add only that failure to timely file a certificate of authorization, which was required in this instance in order for there to be a valid designating petition (Election Law §6-120 [3]), constituted a "fatal defect” under Election Law § 1-106 (2). Moreover, because the petition is void under the statute, the defect cannot be considered merely "technical” (see, Matter of Harden v Board of Elections, 74 NY2d 796 ).
Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Bellacosa. Judge Hancock, Jr., dissents in part and votes to affirm in a memorandum in which Judge Titone concurs.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9788125. Public record. Not legal advice.