Matter of Lefkowitz v. Cohen
Cases that cite this one
30 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Citizens Committee to Recall Rizzo v. Board of Elections (Pa. 1976)
- Telaro v. Telaro (N.Y. 1969)
- Proskin v. May (N.Y. 1976)
- In re Petition of Smith (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1971)
- McGovern v. Smith (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1971)
- Reid v. Trammell (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1961)
- Hayon v. Carrion (New York Supreme Court 2013)
- Thomas v. Eugene (New York Supreme Court 2013)
- Bronson v. Cartonia (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
- Klugman v. King (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- Buchanan v. Espada (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
- Molloy v. Scaringe (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
- Franco v. Velez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Jonas v. Velez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Rodriguez v. Harris (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1980)
- Bramwell v. Gargiulo (New York Supreme Court 1980)
- Proskin v. May (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1976)
- Fazio v. Power (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1970)
- Aronson v. Power (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1968)
- Lahiff v. Lawley (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1967)
- Guptill Holding Corp. v. State (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1964)
- Cullen v. Power (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1964)
- Hooper v. Power (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1962)
- Hooper v. Paley (New York Supreme Court 1962)
- Haas v. Costigan (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1961)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The court agrees unanimously with the conclusions of the Appellate Division in regard to the first two “ specific grounds ” stated by it in the opinion. Lehman, Ch. J., and Finch, J., vote to reverse on the ground that it is undisputed that some of the canvassers swore falsely to the signatures of a large proportion of those named upon the sheets witnessed by them and that, therefore, in the absence of some explanation by such canvassers there is no basis for any finding that the other signatures upon the sheets are genuine.
A majority of the court are of opinion that this ground is not open to the appellants upon this record, because it is inconsistent with the theory of the trial and with the corresponding disposition made of the issues both by the Special Term and by the Appellate Division, which was that 6,182 signatures were genuine.
The orders should be affirmed, without costs.
Loughran, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ., concur; Lehman, Ch. J., and Finch, J., dissent.
Orders affirmed, etc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.