¶1I concur in the opinion of the presiding justice save in one respect. I think the ballot should have Contained the.numbering and heading of the questions as stated in section 16 of the Liquor Tax Law (Laws of 1896, chap. 112, as amd. by Laws of 1905, chap. 680), but the omission of the election -officers 'to furnish ballots of that description did not of itself invalidate the election, and is not sufficient to warrant ordering a new election in view of the fact that the voters were not misled and the election affected thereby.
112 A.D. 562
In re Merow
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided May 2, 1906
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1906-05-02
Appeal by the petitioner, John Merow, from an order of the Supreme Oonrt, made at the Erie Special Term and entered in the office of the cleric of the county of Cattaraugus on the 11th day of December, 1905, denying the petitioner’s application for an order vacating and setting aside the return and canvass made .by the inspectors of election of the town of Little Valley, on the 7th day of November, 1905, and the canvass of the board made thereon on the four questions…
Decided 1906-05-02