In May 2025, A.A.C. filed an independent nominating petition with the New York City Board of Elections to run for the 46th Council District seat under the Protect Animals Party. The petition also named C.S. as the party’s candidate for mayor. Shortly after, L.M., a resident and registered voter in the 46th District, filed objections to A.A.C.’s petition, challenging only her candidacy. The Board sustained the objections and invalidated her petition.
A.A.C. then brought a proceeding under Election Law § 16-102 seeking to validate her petition. She argued that L.M. lacked standing and that his objections were procedurally defective because he had not served a copy on C.S., which she claimed was required under Election Law § 6-154.
The Kings County Supreme Court rejected her arguments. It held that in multi-candidate petitions, each candidate’s portion is treated as a separate petition. Since L.M.’s challenge was directed solely at A.A.C., he was not required to serve C.S. The court also found that L.M. had standing because he lived and was registered to vote in the district. The petition was denied, and the proceeding dismissed.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed. It agreed that service on C.S. was unnecessary in this context and that L.M.’s residency and voter registration gave him the right to object. Finding no merit in A.A.C.’s other claims, the court upheld the invalidation of her petition, ending her attempt to appear on the November 2025 ballot for the 46th Council District.
Petitions are such fragile animals ....
# # #
DECISION