Two of New York's minor political parties—the Working Families Party and Conservative Party—have dropped Gov. Andrew Cuomo as a defendant in their separate lawsuits over the future of fusion voting, which allows candidates to run on multiple ballot lines, saying the litigation will be resolved faster without him as a party.

In court papers filed in Niagara County Supreme Court on Tuesday, attorneys for both parties said they would discontinue their claims against Cuomo, who was one of several defendants in those suits.

The litigation was brought by the Working Families Party and Conservative Party in separate lawsuits two months ago to challenge the Public Campaign Financing and Election Commission, a body created by the Legislature this year to develop and implement a public financing system for candidates running in New York.

But the commission is also expected to consider ending fusion voting, which would essentially force candidates to give up their simultaneous place on minor party lines in favor of one of the two major political parties.

Fusion voting, a practice unique to New York, allows candidates to run on two different party lines at once. So, a candidate could appear on the ballot as the candidate for both the Democrat line and the Working Families Party line, for example.

Because of rules in New York about being placed on a ballot, an end to fusion voting would largely diminish the political clout of minor parties like the Working Families Party and Conservative Party, which are considered to be less moderate versions of the major parties.

The lawsuit alleged that the concept of fusion voting, while not enshrined in statute, is supported by the state constitution and sections of the state Election Law, which guarantees voters access to a "free exercise of the elective franchise."

The commission is scheduled to issue its final report in December. Unlike other panels convened by state lawmakers, the public financing commission will issue a report that carries the force of law.

Richard Brodsky, a former Assemblyman and attorney who's representing the Working Families Party, said Tuesday that having Cuomo involved in the litigation may have prolonged it past when the report is due.

"It's just to move the litigation along," Brodsky said. "We're trying to streamline this because of time. The commission's out of existence in three months."

William F. Savino, a partner at Woods Oviatt Gilman in Buffalo who is representing the Conservative Party in its challenge, said Cuomo wasn't needed as a target for the litigation because he hasn't publicly said he would like to see fusion voting end.

"He's taken a position publicly that he has no position one way or another on fusion voting," Savino said. "So it's unnecessary to keep him in the case complicating the litigation."

The litigation is complicated by Cuomo's troubled relationship with the Working Families Party in recent years. The party, after choosing him in previous years, declined to endorse him in the last primary election for governor, instead opting to support his rival, actor Cynthia Nixon.

The Working Families Party has claimed, publicly, that Cuomo has since had it out for them, even pointing to efforts by Jay Jacobs, the state Democratic chair and Cuomo's appointee to the public financing commission, to challenge the concept of fusion voting in New York.

There are still several defendants left in both lawsuits, including the individual members of the public financing commission, the commissioners of the state Board of Elections, and the party leaders in the state Legislature.

They're expected to file an answer to the lawsuit in early October, with the litigation expected to play out soon after.

READ MORE: