From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schundler v. Donovan

Supreme Court of New Jersey
May 6, 2005
183 N.J. 383 (N.J. 2005)


A-126/127/128 September Term 2004

Submitted May 5, 2005

Decided May 6, 2005

Appeal from the Superior Court, Appellate Division.

Ernest P. Fronzuto, submitted a brief on behalf of appellant Paul DiGaetano, et al. (A-126) (Piro, Zinna, Cifelli, Paris, Genitempo, P.C., attorneys).

Steven S. Polinsky, submitted letter briefs on behalf of appellant Steven Lonegan (A-127) (Mr. Polinsky and Cotant, Atkins Fede, attorneys; Mr. Polinsky and Andrew T. Fede, Hackensack, on the briefs).

Mark D. Sheridan, submitted briefs on behalf of appellants Republican County Chairman's Organizations, etc., et al. (A-128) (Drinker, Biddle Reath, L.L.P.).

John M. Carbone, submitted letter briefs on behalf of respondents Kathleen A. Donovan, et al. (Carbone and Faasse, attorneys). Thaddeus R. Maciag, submitted a brief on behalf of respondents Bret Schundler, et al. (Maciag Law, L.L.C.; Howes Howes, and Barry, McTiernan Moore, attorneys; W. Timothy Howes, and Sean M. Connelly, on the brief).

Peter G. Sheridan, submitted letter briefs on behalf of respondents Forrester for Governor, Inc., et al. (Graham, Curtin Sheridan, attorneys).

Douglas F. Doyle, submitted letter briefs on behalf of respondent John Murphy (Edwards Caldwell, L.L.C., attorneys; John A. Stone, on the briefs).

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by the Appellate Division in the opinion of Judge Kestin reported at 377 N.J.Super. 339, 872 A.2d 1092 (2005).

We add only the following.

The Appellate Division suggested several possibilities to achieve the results it ordered, including altered type face and ballot reorganization. We note that N.J.S.A. 19:23-26.1 specifically contemplates such a flexible approach insofar as it provides that "in the case of a primary election for the nomination of a candidate for the office of Governor, the names of all candidates for the office of . . . Governor shall be printed on the official primary ballot in the first column or horizontal row designated for the party of those candidates." (emphasis added). Accord N.J.S.A. 19:49-2.

The question has been raised whether the decision of the Appellate Division applies to all twenty-one counties. We hold that it does.

For affirmance — Chief Justice PORITZ and Justices LONG, ZAZZALI, ALBIN, WALLACE, and RIVERA-SOTO — 6.

Opposed — None.

Summaries of

Schundler v. Donovan

Supreme Court of New Jersey
May 6, 2005
183 N.J. 383 (N.J. 2005)
Case details for

Schundler v. Donovan

Case Details


Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: May 6, 2005


183 N.J. 383 (N.J. 2005)
874 A.2d 506

Citing Cases

Kim v. Hanlon

Some New Jersey state cases have upheld the countyline ballot system. See Schundler v. Donovan, 872 A.2d…

Henry v. New Jersey Department of Human Services

Pinto v. N.J. Mfrs. Ins. Co., 183 N.J. 405, 874 A.2d 520 (2005). Schundler v. Donovan, 183 N.J. 383, 874 A.2d…