STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT CHAMBERS DARRIN M. DIETZ 30 McMaster Street Pracrpa Law CLE : Ballston Spa, New York 12020 ANN C. CROWELL (518) 451-8810 JESSICAR. COOK Justice Fax (518)453-6945 SECRETARY TO JUSTICE March 8, 2019 Jacquelyn P. White, Esq. Miller, Mannix, Schachner & Hafner LLC 15 West Notre Dame Street Glens Falls, NY 12801-28515 RE: Cashin v Wood, et al RJINo. 45-1-2018-1308 Index No. 20183196 Dear Counselor: Enclosed please find the original Decision and Order signed by the Hon. Ann C. Crowell on March 8, 2019 for your filing and entry. The underlying papers have been filed by the Court. Very truly yours, aka fp. Geet a sehen R. Cook i Sécretary to Justice ije Ene. cew/ene: — Phillip M. Perry, Esq.STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT SARATOGA COUNTY JOHN R. CASHIN, GEORGE SANTANGELO. DOUGLAS WEIR, BARBARA FARONE, PAUL F. MURPHY and THOMAS YANNIOS, Petitioners FOR JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CPLR ARTICLE 78 DECISION and JUDGMENT Index No. 20183196 RJI No. 45-1-2018-1308 -against- THOMAS N. WOOD, III, AS SUPERVISOR OF THE TOWN OF SARATOGA, and MICHAEL MCCLOUGHLIN, AS A MEMBER OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SARATOGA, and CHARLES HANEHAN AS A MEMBER OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SARATOGA, and JAMES JENNINGS AS A MEMBER OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SARATOGA and GARY SQUIRES AS A MEMBER OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SARATOGA Respondents. APPEARANCES Phillip M. Pers Attorney for Petitioners P.O. Box 91 Fort Edward, NY 12828 Miller, Mannix, Schachner & Hafner LLC Attorneys for the Respondents 15 West Notre Dame Street Glens Falls, NY 12801-28515 ANN C. CROWELL, J. ‘The petitioners by Order to Show Cause have requested a decision and judgment of the Court mandating the removal of respondent Ian Murray from the Town of Saratoga Planning Page | of 5Board pursuant to an alleged violation of NYS Public Officers Law §§ 3 and 30. The respondents have requested an order dismissing the petition pursuant to CPLR § 3211. Public Officers Law § 3 (1) provides that “[nJo person shall be capable of holding a civil office who shall not ... [be] a resident of the political subdivision ... of the state for which he shall be chosen”. Public Officers Law § 30 (1) (d) further provides that “[e]very office shall be vacant upon ... [the incumbent's] ceasing to be an inhabitant ... of the political subdivision ... of, which he is required to be a resident when chosen.” Hosley v Curry, 85 NYed 447, 451, [1995]. “Resident” and “inhabitant” in the Public Officer Law §§ 3 (1)and 30 are considered to be synonymous with the term domicile. Hosley v Curry, 85 NY2d 447, 451 [1995]. A change of residence alone, even if continued for a long time, does not effect a change of domicile, Id. It is not time, but intention to change domicile that is conclusive of a change of domicile. Id. To establish a new domicile an individual must change his residence and have an “absolute and fixed intention” to abandon his former place of abode and make the new locality a fixed and permanent home. Hosley v Curry, supra. An individual's existing domicile, whether of origin or selection, continues until the individual by location and intent maintains a new domicile. Petitioners’ allegations that Murray has changed his domicile must be established by clear and convincing evidence. Id. The Court was unable to determine Mr. Murray's residence based solely upon the parties’ written submissions. A hearing was scheduled and conducted on February 19, 2019 to determine the sole issue of whether or not Mr. Murrayisa resident of the Town of Saratoga pursuant to the NYS Public Officers Law. Mr. Murray testified on his own behalf. He provided direct responses and was not evasive in answering the questions posed to him. Page 2 of 5