What's happening
This bill extends the timeframe for challenging election petitions, allowing proceedings within three business days after proper service of pleadings.
Why it matters
Extending the deadline to challenge petitions gives more time for candidates, parties, or concerned citizens to respond to issues that might arise late in the petition process. This could reduce the risk of valid concerns being dismissed simply because of tight procedural timelines.
The bill adds flexibility by allowing proceedings within three business days after proper service of pleadings, not just after an official invalidity determination. This means challenges can be filed later in the process, potentially capturing errors or misconduct that only become clear after initial filings.
This change could impact campaign strategies and election administration, as it may increase the number and complexity of legal challenges surrounding candidate qualifications and ballot access. It creates additional opportunities for disputes to be heard, which could delay finalizing candidate lists but also enhance procedural fairness.
Albany, before your first meeting.
Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.
Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.
Who cares
Headline styles
Extend Petition Challenge Deadlines
Plain English, a few words. Used as the page title.
Sponsors
No co-sponsors yet.
History
- Referred to elections
- Referred to elections
Companion bill
The same bill in the other chamber. A bill becomes law when one version passes both houses and the governor signs it, so either number can carry it.
Extend Petition Challenge Deadline
In Assembly Committee · Election Law · Sponsor Robert C. Carroll
Full text
1 pageUnderlined is new[Struck] is removedOfficial text on nysenate.gov ↗
STATE OF NEW YORK
5406
2019-2020 Regular Sessions
IN SENATE
April 30, 2019
Introduced by Sen. MYRIE -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Elections
AN ACT to amend the election law, in relation to proceedings with respect to designating and nominating petitions
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. Subdivision 2 of section 16-102 of the election law, as amended by chapter 79 of the laws of 1992, is amended to read as follows:
2. A proceeding with respect to a petition shall be instituted (a) within fourteen days after the last day to file the petition, [or] (b) within three business days after the officer or board with whom or which such petition was filed, makes a determination of invalidity with respect to such petition, or (c) within three business days after the proper service of pleadings for a timely invalidation proceeding, whichever is later; except that a proceeding with respect to a petition for a village election or an independent nomination for a special election shall be instituted within seven days after the last day to file the petition for such village election or independent nomination or within three business days after the officer or board with whom or which such petition was filed, makes a determination of invalidity with respect to such petition, whichever is later. A proceeding with respect to a primary, convention, meeting of a party committee, or caucus shall be instituted within ten days after the holding of such primary or convention or the filing of the certificate of nominations made at such caucus or meeting of a party committee.
§ 2. This act shall take effect immediately.
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD01648-01-9
Reflowed for reading: line numbers and page breaks removed. Cite the official text.
Sponsor's memo
Title of bill
An act to amend the election law, in relation to proceedings with respect to designating and nominating petitions
Purpose
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 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.
Legislative history
A.8243 of 2017-18
Fiscal implications
None to the State.
Effective date
This act shall take effect immediately.
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.