Matter of Smith v. Jansen, 26 N.Y.2d 516 (1970)
r
The power to judge the qualifications of its members lies with the legislative body to which the member is elected, not with a prior legislative body that was in office at the time of the election.
r
Summary
r
This case addresses whether an outgoing legislative body has the authority to challenge the residence qualifications of a member-elect of the incoming council. The Court of Appeals held that it does not. The court reasoned that although staggered elections provide continuity, the Rochester City Charter makes it clear that the council is reconstituted and reorganized following each annual election. Therefore, the power to inspect the credentials and qualifications of its members lies with the newly formed council, not the outgoing one. The decision emphasizes the importance of a legislative body determining the qualifications of its *own* members.
r
Facts
r
Appellants, former members of the Rochester City Council whose terms ended in December 1969, challenged the qualifications of a member-elect of the incoming council. They argued that because the council members were elected on a staggered basis, the council was a continuing body, giving them the authority to challenge the member-elect’s qualifications.
r
Procedural History
r
The case originated in a lower court (likely a trial court), where the appellants’ challenge was presumably unsuccessful. The appellants then appealed to the Appellate Division, which affirmed the lower court’s decision. The appellants subsequently appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
r
Issue(s)
r
Whether an outgoing legislative body, whose members were elected on a staggered basis, has the power to challenge the residence qualifications of a member-elect of the incoming council.
r
Holding
r
No, because the power to inspect the credentials and qualifications of its members lies with the newly constituted council, not the outgoing one.
r
Court’s Reasoning
r
The Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division’s order, holding that the outgoing council lacked the power to challenge the qualifications of the incoming member. The court relied on Section 5-7 of the Rochester City Charter, which states that “The council may determine the rules of its own proceedings and is the judge of the election and qualification of its members.” The court reasoned that the plaintiff was not one of “its members” of the 1969 council. While staggered elections guarantee continuity in a legislative body, the charter provisions make it clear that the Rochester council is reconstituted and reorganized following each annual election.
r
The court quoted Section 5-5 of the Charter, noting that councilmembers meet on the first business day in January following a municipal election to organize as the new council and select a mayor and other officers. This annual reorganization is necessarily tied to the power to inspect the credentials and qualifications of new members.
r
The court cited 3 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations for the proposition that “The legislative body to which a member is elected is the tribunal to try [his qualifications], and not the body in office at the time of the election.”