GEORGE MCDONALD plfap, v. NEW YORK CITY CAMPAIGN FINANCE BOARD def-res

12495. GEORGE MCDONALD plfap, v. NEW YORK CITY CAMPAIGN FINANCE BOARD def-res — Genova Burns Giantomasi Webster LLC, New York (Laurence D. Laufer of counsel), for ap — Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jane L. Gordon of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Kathryn E. Freed, J.), entered on or about May 3, 2013, which denied plaintiffs' motion for a declaration that Administrative Code of City of NY §3-719(2)(b) is preempted by State Election Law article 14, and an injunction against enforcement of the local law provision, and granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny defendants' motion, and to declare that Administrative Code §3-719(2)(b) is not preempted by Election Law article 14, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

12495. GEORGE MCDONALD plfap, v. NEW YORK CITY CAMPAIGN FINANCE BOARD def-res — Genova Burns Giantomasi Webster LLC, New York (Laurence D. Laufer of counsel), for ap — Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jane L. Gordon of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Kathryn E. Freed, J.), entered on or about May 3, 2013, which denied plaintiffs’ motion for a declaration that Administrative Code of City of NY §3-719(2)(b) is preempted by State Election Law article 14, and an injunction against enforcement of the local law provision, and granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny defendants’ motion, and to declare that Administrative Code §3-719(2)(b) is not preempted by Election Law article 14, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

A local law is preempted by state law where either there is a direct conflict or inconsistency between the two laws or the Legislature has evinced an intent to occupy the field (Albany Area Bldrs. Assn. v. Town of Guilderland, 74 NY2d 372, 377 [1989]; Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y. v. Town of Red Hook, 60 NY2d 99, 107-108 [1983]). We do not find that the Legislature evinced an intent to occupy the field of campaign contribution limits simply by stating, in Election Law §14-114, that the limits set forth therein “apply to all contributions to candidates for election to any public office or for nomination for any such office, or for election to any party positions, and to all contributions to political committees working… with any candidate.” This statement only evinces the Legislature’s intent to include all such candidates within the law’s reach. It is not evident that additional, not inconsistent, legislation regarding contributions is precluded.

GEORGE MCDONALD plfap, v. NEW YORK CITY CAMPAIGN FINANCE BOARD def-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal