•  Summary 
  •  
  •  Actions 
  •  
  •  Committee Votes 
  •  
  •  Floor Votes 
  •  
  •  Memo 
  •  
  •  Text 
  •  
  •  LFIN 
  •  
  •  Chamber Video/Transcript 

A00713 Summary:

BILL NOA00713
 
SAME ASNo Same As
 
SPONSORCarroll
 
COSPNSRSeawright, Epstein, Shimsky, Glick, Jacobson
 
MLTSPNSR
 
Amd §16-102, El L
 
Allows for limited three-day expansion of the statute of limitations where a proceeding to invalidate a designating or nominating petition has been commenced.
Go to top    

A00713 Actions:

BILL NOA00713
 
01/11/2023referred to election law
01/03/2024referred to election law
Go to top

A00713 Memo:

NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION
submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
 
BILL NUMBER: A713
 
SPONSOR: Carroll
  TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the election law, in relation to proceedings with respect to designating and nominating petitions   PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL: New York Election Law § 16-102 provides for the statute of limitations for proceedings with respect to designating and nominating petitions, opportunity to ballot petitions, any proceeding in supreme court by any aggrieved candidate, or chairman or any party committee or any person who has filed objections. Currently, if a proceeding to invalidate a petition is brought, there is no opportunity to seek validation by the respondent, unless it is instituted in a separate proceeding within the same time limits. Thus, a candidate would have to anticipate an oppo- nent's challenge, in order to thoroughly validate his. or her own peti- tion. This bill would allow a validation proceeding to be brought within three business days after the proper service of a timely invalidation proceeding.   SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS: Section 1 of the bill amends § 16-102(2) of the election law to specify that a proceeding may be brought within three business days after the proper service of pleadings for a timely invalidation proceeding. Section 2 of the bill is the effective date.   JUSTIFICATION: In the Matter of Suarez v. Sadowski, (48 N.Y.2d 620 (1979)), the Court of Appeals held that the respondent could not put forth evidence seeking to validate signatures on his underlying petition that had been previ- ously found invalid by the Board of Elections, but which were not the signatures at issue in the court proceeding. The majority cited that no cross-petition to validate had been filed and that petitioner hadn't been alerted by way of notice in the proceeding that respondents intended to seek validation, finding that it would be 'manifestly unfair to suddenly confront them with the necessity of meeting" the respond- ent's offer of proof. In his dissent, Judge Gabrielli stated that the court's decision "needlessly complicates that speedy process for the resolution of disputes concerning the validity of designating petitions which is contemplated" in the election law, and that requiring a candi- date to bring his or her own proceeding to validate or serve a respon- sive pleading of some undisclosed nature is neither "contemplated or authorized by the Election Law." Acknowledging the obvious and sometimes painful time constraints for election proceedings, Judge Gabrielli also reasoned that such a proffer should be allowed under section 16-116 of the election law and that the validity of all signatures on the petitions should be at issue in any invalidation proceeding. Notwith- standing this sound interpretation, the majority's ruling, that a sepa- rate petition to validate must be brought, has endured. This bill would allow for limited three-day expansion of the statute of limitations where a proceeding to invalidate a petition has been commenced, in keep- ing with the spirit of Judge Gabrielli's analysis.   PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: A.8243 of 2017-18 A.3328/S.5406 of 2019-20 A.634/S.258 of 2021-22   FISCAL IMPLICATION: None to the State.   EFFECTIVE DATE: . This act shall take effect immediately.
Go to top