On June 15, a New York Supreme Court Judge in Albany dismissed the lawsuit Redlich v New York State Board of Canvassers, 1623-11, on procedural grounds. This is the lawsuit in which the Libertarian Party argued that its gubernatorial nominee in 2010, Warren Redlich, might very well have received 50,000 votes if the Libertarian Party had not been squeezed into a party column with another party. The lawsuit also argued that not all absentee votes had been counted and if they had been, the party might have been credited with at least 50,000 votes. If the party had received 50,000 votes, it would now be a qualified party. Instead it was credited with 48,386 votes.
The case was dismissed on the grounds that it should have been filed within 30 days of the official canvass of votes.
The New York Libertarian Party has another election lawsuit pending in federal court, on a different issue. That case, Credico v New York State Board of Elections, challenges the state law that says if a candidate is nominated by two unqualified parties, he or she can only be listed once on the ballot. By contrast, if a candidate is nominated by a qualified party and an unqualified party, or by two qualified parties, he or she is listed twice. That case is undergoing discovery.
Another similar case, Conservative Party of New York v New York State Board of Elections, is also pending in federal court. That case challenges the state policy on how to count votes when a voter casts two votes in a single race, for the same person but on two different party lines. The state gives the vote to the party that is higher on the ballot than the other party.
“The case was dismissed on the grounds that it should have been filed within 30 days of the official canvass of votes.”
Why is it that many 3rd parties seem to not check the rules of court before filing a case? Or is this a ruling the judge “pulled out of the air?”
I have often read where many 3rd party cases were dismissed on procedural grounds or not filing in the correct court. Doesn’t someone keep a list of these “procedural” rulings and make them available for other 3rd parties in future cases?
Of course, there is no guarantee the Court would have ruled favorably even if it had been filed within the “30 days.” The courts are not our friends – ocassionally yes – but usually not.
Did the lawyer get paid — or get sued for legal malpractice ???
Agree with you Demo Rep. An attorney should know the rules of the court. If an attorney flubs it for the 3rd party, the party should not have to pay.
Too bad the LPNY didn’t check the rules. They might be dumb rules, but you gotta follow procedure. Yes, the absentee ballots weren’t counted. Yes, the LPNY deserves ballot access because they got over 50,000 votes. Therefore, since there was a reasonable doubt of tie authenticity of the election results, THE SUIT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP SOONER.
Pingback: Chair of LPNY gives update on Warren Redlich’s vote tally lawsuit | Independent Political Report
and remember also this petitioning season:
Validating Petitions Under Art. 16 of the New York Election Law — as another election cycle begins, it is important to remember that special proceedings “instituted” under §16-102(2) of the Election Law can have a limitations period as short as three days.
To Alabama Independent and the other naysayers (reposted from my comments at other naysayers at IPR) :
I would never second guess a lawsuit, without reading all the papers. And, I would never second guess it in favor of the facist duopoly who run our courts.
I can think of a few reasons why the situation might have occurred. For example: The judge might have forced the lawsuit into the mold of mere “vote counting” according to a BOE schedule, and the electoral activists filing may have been trying (rightfully) to assert it is a Constitutional issue, which would have theoretically given them more time.
Anyway, I am glad they tried something to fight back against tyranny.
The action was timely filed as Article 78 proceeding (which has a four-month statute of limitations).
BOE argued the 30-day S/L to overturn election results applies instead (even though that was not what we were trying to do–everyone knew Cuomo won the election and we never challenged the result). Unfortunately, Justice Platkin accepted that argument.
Pingback: New York State Court Dismisses Libertarian Lawsuit on 2010 Gubernatorial Tally | ThirdPartyPolitics.us