82 N.Y.2d 813 (1993)

When a vacancy occurs too late for the normal petitioning process, the authority to nominate a candidate rests with the newly elected party officials, not the outgoing ones, especially if certification of the new officials is feasible within the statutory timeframe.

Summary

This case addresses the authority to nominate a Republican candidate for the New York State Senate when a vacancy arises too late for a primary election. The outgoing Kings County Republican Party Chairman nominated himself, arguing insufficient time to organize the new county committee. The Court of Appeals reversed the lower court, which had favored the newly elected committee’s right to choose a candidate, based on the dissent in the Appellate Division. The dissent argued the newly elected committee could have been certified in time to select a candidate and that the outgoing chair was functus officio, lacking authority after the primary election.

Facts

A vacancy for the 23rd Senatorial District arose too late for the normal primary petitioning process. Under Republican Party rules, the county chairpersons of Kings and Richmond Counties (primarily Kings due to larger representation) nominate the candidate. Robert DiCarlo, the outgoing Kings County Republican Party Chairman, nominated himself. A primary election had already been held, and a new county committee was selected. The new committee argued that it had the right to elect a new chairman who then would select the candidate.

Procedural History

The Supreme Court initially ruled in favor of the petitioners (the newly elected committee), finding the outgoing chairperson was functus officio. The Appellate Division affirmed. The New York Court of Appeals reversed, adopting the dissenting opinion from the Appellate Division which favored dismissing the petitions.

Issue(s)

Whether the outgoing Chairman of the Kings County Republican Party had the authority to nominate himself as the Republican candidate for State Senator, given that a primary election had been held and a new county committee selected, but there was limited time to certify the new committee before the nomination deadline.

Holding

No, because the newly elected county committee could have been certified in time to select a candidate, rendering the outgoing chairman without authority (functus officio).

Court’s Reasoning

The Court of Appeals adopted the reasoning of the dissenting judge in the Appellate Division. The dissent emphasized that Election Law § 6-158(6) requires certificates for party nominations (other than those from primary elections) to be filed after the primary election, suggesting that the newly elected committee should influence the selection. The dissent noted that Election Law § 2-106(4) states that county committee members hold office until the next election. The dissent relied on the factual finding by the lower courts that the Board of Elections could have certified the newly elected committee members within approximately three days after the primary election. Based on that factual finding, the dissent concluded that there was sufficient time for the new chair to take office and nominate a candidate, rendering the outgoing chair without authority. The dissent cited Matter of Torchin v Cohen and Matter of McDonald v Heffernan, which support the view that an outgoing committee or chairperson lacks authority to select candidates after the election of their successors. The dissent noted: “Both the Supreme Court and the Appellate Division made the factual finding that the Board of Elections “could have certified the newly elected committee members within approximately three days” after the primary election (197 AD2d 724, 726). That factual finding is binding on this Court.”