People ex rel. Derrick v. Somers

Order affirmed, with costs, on the authority of Raymond v. Clement (118 App. Div. 528; affd., 194 N. Y. 560). All concurred, except Kruse, P. J., and Foote, J., who dissented upon the ground that there must be a substantial compliance with *969the statute* to make an effective vote; and it appearing that the statute was not complied with, as has been adjudicated in the proceeding to which the Commissioner was a party [See Matter of Kline, 185 App. Div. 945], are of opinion that the action of the Commissioner in refusing the certificate was unwarranted.