New York Court of Appeals, 1975

MATTER OF WEILL v. Erickson

New York Court of Appeals · Decided October 17, 1975 · Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Fuchsberg and Cooke Concur in Per Curiam Opinion Judge Wachtler Taking No Part

37 N.Y.2d 851; 340 N.E.2d 473; 378 N.Y.S.2d 39; 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 2232

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision.

ANGLETTI, FRANCIS J. v. MORREALE, MARCUS (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Streng v. Westchester County Board of Elections (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Streng v. Westchester County Board of Elections (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Angletti v. Morreale (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Angletti v. Morreale (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
May v. Daly (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
Corpuel v. Galasso (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
Flannery v. General Motors Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
City of New York v. Wall Street Racquet Club, Inc. (Civil Court of the City of New York 1987)
Department of Housing Preservation & Development v. Arick (Civil Court of the City of New York 1986)

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

Per Curiam.

This proceeding was brought pursuant to subdivision 2 of section 330 of the Election Law to invalidate the Democratic Party primary election held on September 9, 1975 for five public offices of Member of City Council of the City of Long Beach.

On the basis of the analysis of the distribution of votes, valid and invalid, among the election districts and the candidates, furnished the court by the parties, appellant Weill has not carried the burden of establishing as a matter of law her entitlement to the relief she seeks. Accordingly, on this appeal, the order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The appeal taken by respondents Leslie, Sabbeth and Erickson should be dismissed. None is aggrieved by the modification at the Appellate Division (CPLR 5601, subd [a], par [iii]). Indeed, none is an aggrieved party (CPLR 5511).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in Per Curiam opinion; Judge Wachtler taking no part.

On petitioner’s appeal: Order affirmed, without costs.

On respondents’ appeal: Appeal dismissed, without costs.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.