Gawron v. Town of Cheektowaga
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Dissent
Lindley and Sconiers, JJ.
(dissenting). We respectfully dissent because we conclude, based on the facts and circumstances of the subject motor vehicle accident, that Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1103 (b) does not apply as a matter of law in this case. We therefore conclude that Supreme Court properly refused to dismiss the negligence claims in the first cause of action. Specifically, while we agree with the majority that the access road where the accident occurred constitutes a “highway” (see generally Groninger v Village of Mamaroneck, 17 NY3d 125, 129 [2011]; Healy v City of Tonawanda, 234 AD2d…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Groninger v. Village of MamaroneckNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
- Kabir v. County of MonroeNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
- GOODWIN, ROBETTE v. PRETORIUS, M.D., RICHARDAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- LoGrasso v. City of TonawandaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Kirshtein v. Americu Credit UnionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.