In re De Groot
In re De Groot
120 N.Y.S. 1121
(New York Supplement)
Opinion of the Court
Order of the Special Term modified in the following particulars: Ballot Exhibit No. 20 is a void ballot, and should not have been counted for James McLaughlin. Ballot Exhibit No. 36 is a void ballot, and should not have been counted for William A. De Groot. Ballot Exhibit No. 29 is a void ballot, and should not have been counted for James F. McLaughlin. Ballot Exhibit No. 42 is a void ballot, and should not have been counted for James F. McLaughlin. The order, in so far as it is appealed from, as so modified, should be affirmed, without costs to either party, and a recount had in accordance with this decision. See, also, 119 N. Y. Supp. 1123.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.