Legal Opinion
Primeau v. Town of Amherst
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 27, 2005PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs.
The Appellate Division correctly concluded that “there is no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences to support the jury’s finding that [the snowplow driver] acted with reckless disregard for the safety of others.” The record is devoid of evidence supporting the verdict finding defendant driver guilty of operating a snowplow recklessly within the meaning of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1103 (b) (see Riley v County of Broome, 95 NY2d 455, 465-466 [2000]).
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Riley v. County of BroomeNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
3Cited by11 opinions
- Rockland Coaches, Inc. v. Town of ClarkstownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Catanzaro v. Town of LewistonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Haist v. Town of NewsteadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Curella v. Town of AmherstAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- ROBERTS, GEORGE J. v. ANDERSON, MICHAEL J.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.