Previous 46 / 48 Next

- 20 - Nos. 56 & 58 Relying on the original April 2, 2020 deadline for filing designating petitions, Ms. Hawatmeh’s scheduled cancer treatment in St. Louis, Missouri for March 14-24, 2020. Her petition designating her a Conservative Party candidate the United States House of Representatives for New York’s 19th Congressional District was timely filed, complete and error-free. Upon learning of the change to Election Law § 6-158 pursuant to chapter 24 of the Laws of 2020 on March 22, Ms. Hawatmeh flew back to New York in the midst of a global pandemic grounding flights and requiring state-wide lockdowns. Upon arrival in New York, she signed the certificate of acceptance in front of a notary on March 24, though the post offices were closed by the time she did so. On March 25, she sent the certificate by overnight delivery via Priority Mail Express, and the State Board of Elections received it on March 26, 2020. The majority now repeats the Appellate Division’s error. Ms. Hawatmeh’s certificate of acceptance was timely filed under the plain language of Election Law § 1106 (1). The statute reads as follows, in pertinent part: “All papers sent by mail in an envelope postmarked prior to midnight of the last day of filing shall be deemed timely filed and accepted for filing when received, except that all certificates and petitions of designation or nomination, certificates of acceptance or declination of such designations or nominations, certificates of authorization for such designations or nominations, certificates of disqualification, certificates of substitution for such designations or nominations and objections and specifications of objections to such certificates and petitions required to be filed with the state board of elections or a board of elections outside of the city of New York shall be deemed timely filed and accepted for filing if sent by mail or overnight delivery service pursuant to subdivision three of this section, and received no later than two business days after the last day - 20 -

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Seawright v. Board of Elections & In re Hawatmeh v. State Board of Elections

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether late filings during the COVID-9 pandemic constitute unique circumstances that would permit remedy of the fatal defect when otherwise not provide in law.

Alleged Acts: On March 19, 2020 Seawright filed a petition for candidacy for the 76th Assembly District on the Democratic Party primary ballot. The petition itself consisted of more than ten pages and a coversheet was required for both. Seawright failed to file the coversheet by the March 20th deadline. Similarly, on March 19, 2020 Seawright filed a petition for the exact same office under the Working Families Party. This petition required a certificate accepting the designation because Seawright did not belong to that political party. Seawright failed to meet the march 24th deadline for this filing. The City Board invalidated both petitions based on the failure to file the required documents. On March 20, 2020 Hawatmeh filed a petition as a Conservative Party Member for the 19th Congressional District. From March 20-March 24, 2020 Hawatmeh was out of town for a prescheduled cancer treatment. Hawatmeh was not a member of the Conservative Party and was accordingly required to file a certificate accepting the designation. Hawatmeh failed to file by the March 24th deadline and the State Board designated the petition invalid.

Procedural history: The First Appellate Division determined that the COVID-9 pandemic presented unique circumstance and that the late filing of a cover sheet and certificate of acceptance was not a constitute fatal defect. However, the Third Appellate Division reached the opposite verdict in In re Hawatmeh v. New York State Board of Elections.

Summary: New York’s Electoral Code requires that any failure to file “shall be a fatal defect.” The court mandates often upheld these strict deadlines, despite the circumstances of the potential candidate. The court stated that COVID-19 has impacted many candidates and although many legislative directives have been relaxed, the candidates must still timely file. The court state that the legislature must be the party to create exception to the law, should it need them, not the judicial system. Further, the cover sheets and firm could be submitted by an agent, so even if Seawright and Hawatmeh were unable, the forms could be filed by members of the campaigns. Alternatively, Executive Order 202.7 permitted audio-visual technology or mailed to the Board of Elections. More than 1,000 petitions were timely filed, many of whom experienced the same of similar circumstances.

Conclusion: The Court of Appeals reversed Seawright and affirmed Hawatmeh.

Legal Issue(s)

Candidate Registration
Health Concerns & Election Administration

Applicable Law(s): NYCRR 6215.1 [b]&[e}

Region: Americas

Country: United States of America

Language of Decision

English

Court: Appellate Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: May 21, 2020

Geolocation

Latitude: 40.73592033063037

Longitude: -73.99396234616334

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

Seawright v. Board of Elections.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Seawright v. Board of Elections & In re Hawatmeh v. State Board of Elections

Primary Documents

Notifications