CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Emery v. Robertson County Election Commission

Taylor Ted Emery and Claude Bellar contested the August 1978 elections for Sheriff and Fourth District County Commission positions in Robertson County. The Chancellor initially found irregularities but believed they didn't affect the outcome for the Sheriff's race or one County Commissioner, though a supplemental opinion later ordered a new election for the second Commissioner. On appeal, the Supreme Court identified numerous violations of absentee voting statutes and inconsistencies in the lower court's rulings. The court determined that the extent of the irregularities, including the personal participation of the incumbent Sheriff in handling absentee ballot applications, rendered both the Sheriff's election and all Fourth District County Commission elections incurably uncertain. As a result, all contested elections were voided, and the respective offices declared vacant, with costs assigned to the Robertson County Election Commission.

election lawvoter irregularitiesabsentee votingelection fraud opportunityjudicial review of electionscounty government electionssheriff electionTennessee Supreme Courtstatutory violationsincurable uncertainty
References
12
Case No. Proceedings No. 1, 2, and 3
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 21, 2009

Stewart v. Chautauqua County Board of Elections

This case involves three consolidated proceedings under Election Law article 16 concerning a general election for the position of Chautauqua County Legislator for the Seventh District. The court modified a lower court order, invalidating the J.K. affidavit ballot due to the voter's lack of residency and validating two previously unreadable optical scan ballots, concluding voters did not abandon them. It upheld the validity of the John Doe affidavit ballot, citing a lack of jurisdiction for challenges. The court also affirmed the validity of two absentee ballots despite initial application irregularities and the presence of extrinsic materials. A cross-appeal by Leon H. Beightol regarding the opening and validity of absentee ballots was dismissed in part and denied in part.

Election LawAbsentee BallotsOptical Scan BallotsAffidavit BallotsVoter ResidenceBallot ValidityJudicial EstoppelCross AppealChautauqua CountyGeneral Election
References
25
Case No. Nos. 56 & 58
Regular Panel Decision
May 21, 2020

Matter of Seawright v. Board of Elections / Matter of Hawatmeh v. State Board of Elections

The New York Court of Appeals addressed two consolidated cases, *Matter of Seawright* and *Matter of Hawatmeh*, to resolve a departmental split regarding the interpretation of Election Law filing deadlines during the COVID-19 pandemic. In *Seawright*, the Appellate Division, First Department, had excused a candidate's belated filing of a cover sheet and certificate of acceptance due to COVID-19 related illness and quarantine, deeming it not a fatal defect. Conversely, in *Hawatmeh*, the Appellate Division, Third Department, found a candidate's late filing of a certificate of acceptance to be a fatal defect despite pandemic circumstances. The Court of Appeals reversed the *Seawright* decision and affirmed the *Hawatmeh* decision, holding that Election Law § 1-106 (2) mandates strict compliance with filing deadlines. The Court concluded that the failure to timely file constitutes a fatal defect that courts cannot excuse, even under unique or extenuating circumstances like the COVID-19 pandemic, emphasizing that it is the legislature's role to fashion exceptions to the law. Dissenting judges argued for a more flexible interpretation based on legislative intent behind pandemic-related laws and prior Election Law reforms, allowing for substantial compliance during the unprecedented health crisis.

Election LawCOVID-19 PandemicFiling DeadlinesFatal DefectStrict ComplianceBallot AccessJudicial DiscretionLegislative IntentAppellate Division ConflictQuarantine Requirements
References
39
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 26, 1996

Gelb v. Board of Elections in the City of New York

Plaintiff Irving Gelb challenged the New York State Board of Elections, alleging violations of his federal and state rights during the 1993 Bronx County Democratic Party primary and general election. Gelb, a write-in candidate, claimed the Board failed to properly inform voters about write-in options and provide necessary means like ballot space and pencils. The defendants moved for summary judgment, which the court granted, while denying Gelb's motion. The court found that the alleged election irregularities did not amount to pervasive unfairness or intentional discrimination to constitute a federal constitutional violation under due process or equal protection clauses, and adequate state remedies were available. Consequently, the federal claims were dismissed, and the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims, dismissing them without prejudice.

Election LawWrite-in VotingConstitutional RightsDue ProcessEqual ProtectionSummary JudgmentFederal JurisdictionState Law ClaimsAbstention DoctrineVoting Irregularities
References
31
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 30, 1977

Hanney v. Commissioners of Elections of Westchester County

John F. Hanney, the petitioner, challenged the results of the Conservative Party primary election for Council Member in the 11th Ward of Yonkers, where Raphael Wik was certified as the winner. Hanney alleged several irregularities, including uncounted write-in votes for himself and an invalid vote for Wik. The Supreme Court, Westchester County, initially set aside the election and ordered a new primary. The appellate court affirmed this judgment, independently reviewing the record. They found that Hanney should have received five additional votes and that one of Wik's votes was improperly counted, resulting in a tie. Consequently, a new primary election was deemed necessary.

Primary ElectionVote CountingElection IrregularitiesWrite-in VotesVoter IntentTie VoteNew Election OrderedAppellate ReviewWestchester CountyYonkers
References
2
Case No. No. 41
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 13, 2019

The Matter of Bethany Kosmider v.Mark Whitney, as Commissioner of the Essex County Board of Elections

This case addresses whether electronic copies of voted ballots are exempt from disclosure under New York's Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) based on Election Law § 3-222(2). Petitioner Bethany Kosmider sought electronic ballot images from the November 2015 general election from the Essex County Board of Elections. The County Attorney denied the request, citing Election Law § 3-222(2), which restricts examination of "voted ballots" for two years without a court order. While lower courts ordered disclosure, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the statutory restriction applies equally to electronic copies of ballots, thereby precluding their release under FOIL during the two-year period without proper judicial or legislative directive. The decision emphasizes the legislative intent to balance ballot secrecy, anti-tampering measures, accuracy, and finality in the electoral process.

Election LawFOILBallot SecrecyElectronic BallotsVoted BallotsPublic RecordsStatutory InterpretationCourt OrderLegislative IntentGovernment Transparency
References
59
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Gelb v. Board of Elections

Plaintiff Irving A. Gelb (pro se) filed a case ("Gelb II") against the Board of Elections in the City of New York and its individual members and employees, alleging violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights concerning write-in voting procedures in the 1997 elections for Bronx Borough President. This case mirrored an earlier, unsuccessful action ("Gelb I") regarding the 1993 elections. Gelb claimed that the Board failed to provide adequate means or instructions for write-in voting, particularly in primary elections without an "opportunity to ballot" petition. The court denied Gelb's motions for summary judgment and granted the defendants' cross-motion, ruling that the Board's procedures were constitutionally permissible, that no pervasive unfairness was demonstrated, and that sufficient state law remedies were available. Consequently, his state law claims were also dismissed.

Election LawWrite-in VotingSummary JudgmentFederal ClaimsState Law RemediesDue ProcessEqual ProtectionFirst AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentPro Se Litigant
References
24
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Corning v. Board of Elections

Justice Fuchsberg dissents from the majority decision concerning two cases related to New York's Election Law. He argues that subdivision 2 of section 8-100 of the Election Law is unconstitutional as it creates unequal voting hours for primary elections across different counties in the state. Fuchsberg asserts that this disparity violates the equal protection clauses of both Federal and State Constitutions, demanding a strict scrutiny test which the State failed to satisfy. He believes the State's justification of convenience and economy is insufficient to infringe upon the fundamental right of suffrage. Therefore, he advocates for affirming the judgment in Barone v Carey and modifying the Appellate Division's order in Matter of Corning v Board of Elections of Albany County to declare the problematic clause unconstitutional, ensuring uniform voting hours for all citizens.

Election LawVoter RightsEqual Protection ClauseStrict Scrutiny TestPrimary ElectionsVoting HoursConstitutional LawDissenting OpinionSuffrageEconomic Considerations
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Incorporation of the Village of Harrison

This proceeding, brought under Village Law section 2-224, challenged the validity of an election held on October 16, 1974, concerning the incorporation of the Village of Harrison within the Town of Harrison. The petitioner alleged five irregularities, including biased transportation, misleading communications from town officials, voter misinformation at polling places, an inconvenient polling location, and improper voter registration. Despite a strong majority (85%) in favor of incorporation, the petitioner sought to invalidate the results. The court determined that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the alleged irregularities were numerous enough to alter the election's outcome, concluding that the substantial majority for incorporation would not have been reversed. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

Election ChallengeVillage IncorporationVoter IrregularitiesTown of HarrisonSufficiency of EvidenceMajority VoteCampaign MisconductPolling PlaceVoter RegistrationVillage Law
References
5
Case No. 2021 NY Slip Op 05014 [197 AD3d 1503]
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 16, 2021

Matter of Brown v. Erie County Bd. of Elections

Petitioner Byron W. Brown, after an unsuccessful Democratic primary bid for Mayor of Buffalo, submitted an independent nominating petition to the Erie County Board of Elections. The Board invalidated the petition, deeming it untimely under Election Law § 6-158 (9). Supreme Court subsequently granted Brown's petition, declared the filing deadline unconstitutional, and ordered his name added to the general election ballot. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court's judgment, dismissed the petition, and vacated the prior declaration. The appellate court found that Election Law § 6-158 (9) imposes only a minimal burden on constitutional rights, which is justified by legitimate state interests, thereby upholding its constitutionality.

Election LawIndependent Nominating PetitionBallot AccessConstitutional ChallengeFiling DeadlinesPrimary ElectionJudicial ScrutinyAppellate DivisionCandidate RightsVoter Empowerment Act
References
19
Showing 1-10 of 501 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational