186 Misc. 98 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1946
This is a proceeding instituted by Arthur G-. Klein, the Democratic candidate for Representative in Congress from the 19th Congressional District, New York, in the special election to be held on February 19,1946, to invalidate the candidacy of Johannes Steel, the person named as the substituted candidate of the American Labor Party in said special election.
There is no dispute as to the essential facts. In 1934, the respondent, Johannes Steel, then a German national, came to this country for the purpose of acquiring residence here. He had a German passport issued to him in the name under which he was known in Germany, namely, Herbert Stahl. In 1935, he signed and filed a declaration of his intention to obtain citizenship, using the name Herbert Stahl. In 1938, he filed his petition for naturalization under the same name. At the time of the hearing on his application he was asked if he desired to have his name changed. He informed the clerk of the court that he desired to use the name Steel in place of Stahl. A naturalization certificate was issued to him in the name of Herbert Steel, with the following notation on the reverse side: “ Name changed by decree of court from Herbert Stahl as part of the naturalization. Deputy Clerk, February 7, 1938.”
There is no question of identity presented for it was conceded that respondent Johannes Steel is the same person Who was naturalized on February 7,1938, as Herbert Steel. Petitioner’s objection to respondent’s candidacy is based upon the claim that since respondent was naturalized under the name of Herbert Steel he had no right to assume any other name or to be known by any other name.
It was clearly established that respondent, Johannes Steel, has been known by that name socially, professionally and for business purposes for a number of years and that, although he used the names Herbert Steel and Herbert Johannes Steel, from time to time, no doubt or confusion whatever exists' as to his identity.
The proceeding is dismissed. In view of this disposition, it is unnecessary to pass upon the jurisdictional questions raised by respondent. Settle order on one day’s notice.