970 N.Y.S.2d 843 | N.Y. App. Div. | 2013
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Chautauqua County (James H. Dillon, J.), entered August 5, 2013 in a proceeding pursuant to the Election Law. The order dismissed the petition.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to Election Law § 16-102 to invalidate certificates (WilsonPakula certificates) authorizing respondents Vincent W. Horrigan and Larry J. Barmore (unenrolled candidates) to be designated as candidates on the ballot in the next primary election of the Chautauqua County Conservative Party (Conservative Party). We note as background that, earlier this year, the unenrolled candidates filed designating petitions seeking the
Following the Conservative Party’s longstanding local practice, the County Committee’s Executive Committee (Executive Committee), rather than the full County Committee, authorized the unenrolled candidates to be designated as candidates on the party’s primary ballot. Petitioner, a registered Conservative in Chautauqua County, objected to the legality of those authorizations and commenced this proceeding against, inter alia, the unenrolled candidates and respondents Anna M. Wilcox, the Chairwoman of the Conservative Party, and Brian Abram, the Republican Commissioner of the Chautauqua County Board of Elections (collectively, respondents). Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition.
It is undisputed that, pursuant to the Election Law, the County Committee is the default “party committee” empowered to issue Wilson-Pakula certificates for the county offices at issue (Election Law § 6-120 [3]; cf. Matter of Rowles v Orsini, 309 AD2d 1307, 1309 [2003]). Petitioner, however, contends that the rules and regulations of the County Committee of the Conservative Party (County Committee rules) did not effectively delegate that authority to the Executive Committee and thus that the Executive Committee lacked the power to issue the WilsonPakula certificates. We reject that contention and conclude that, under these circumstances, the County Committee rules delegated to the Executive Committee the power to authorize the designation of the unenrolled candidates as candidates for the relevant county offices in the upcoming Conservative Party primary election (see generally Master, 10 NY3d at 625-626; Matter of New York State Comm, of the Independence Party v New York State Bd. of Elections, 87 AD3d 806, 811-812 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 706 [2011]; Matter of Peluso v Erie County Independence Party, 66 AD3d 1329, 1330-1331 [2009]; Matter of Koppell v Garcia, 275 AD2d 587, 588 [2000]).
Article III, § 3 (A) of the County Committee rules states in