Matter of Farber v. Smolka, 27 N.Y.2d 802 (1970)
An informal announcement by a proposed candidate of their intent to decline a nomination, made after the designating petition’s circulation has begun but before its completion and formal declination, does not automatically invalidate the subsequent substitution of another candidate by the Committee to Fill Vacancies, absent evidence of intent to circumvent the Election Law.
Summary
This case concerns the validity of Barry Farber’s designation as a candidate after the initial designee, Barry Gottehrer, informally announced his intention to decline the nomination. Gottehrer, a Democrat, was initially designated as the Liberal Party candidate but later formally declined. The Committee to Fill Vacancies then named Farber, a Republican. The court held that Gottehrer’s prior informal announcement did not invalidate Farber’s designation because there was no evidence of a scheme to circumvent the Election Law, and the formal procedures for substitution were followed. The court emphasized that both the Committee and the petition’s signatories had a legal right to fill the vacancy.
Facts
On May 7, 1970, Barry Gottehrer, a registered Democrat, was nominated in the Liberal Party for Congressman. Because he was not a registered Liberal, the County Committee of the Liberal Party consented to his nomination. On May 13, Gottehrer formally declined the nomination. The Committee to Fill Vacancies then designated Barry Farber, a Republican, filing the certificate on May 18, along with the Liberal Party’s authorization for Farber’s substitution. Prior to his formal declination, on May 4, Gottehrer had informally announced he would decline the designation after the designating petition began circulating but before it was completed. Some signatories claimed they wouldn’t have signed if they knew of the intended substitution.
Procedural History
The lower court invalidated Farber’s designation based on Gottehrer’s May 4th announcement. This decision was appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
Whether an informal announcement by a potential candidate that they intend to decline a nomination, made after the designating petition has begun circulating but before it is complete and before a formal declination, invalidates the subsequent action of the Committee to Fill Vacancies in naming a substitute candidate, when there is no evidence of a scheme to circumvent the Election Law.
Holding
No, because the informal announcement, without evidence of intent to circumvent the normal nominating process or fraud, does not invalidate the Committee’s action when the formal procedures of the Election Law were followed. The Committee to Fill Vacancies and the signatories to the petition had a legal right to have a future vacancy filled.
Court’s Reasoning
The court reasoned that the formal requirements of the Election Law were met, and the informal announcement alone was insufficient to invalidate Farber’s designation. The court emphasized the absence of fraud or a deliberate scheme to circumvent the Election Law’s policy. It acknowledged the argument that using a “stand-in” candidate to manipulate the designation process could be invalid if proven but found no such evidence in this case. The court highlighted that the circulation of the designating petition created legal rights for both the Committee to Fill Vacancies and the signatories, regardless of when they signed the petition relative to Gottehrer’s announcement. The court stated that the fact that some signers would not have signed the petition had they known about the substitution was not decisive, as the process of designation had started and Gottehrer later decided not to take it. The court implied that a scheme to circumvent the policy of the Election Law would be treated differently, but found no basis to hold that this was the intent here. The court concluded that the statute had been fully complied with.