Abrahante v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Abrahante v. City of New York

200 A.D.2d 517, 606 N.Y.S.2d 688

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 25, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 200 A.D.2d 517 (Abrahante v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Abrahante v. City of New York, 200 A.D.2d 517, 606 N.Y.S.2d 688 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.), entered September 22, 1992, which, upon a jury verdict, found that plaintiffs were falsely arrested and awarded each plaintiff $50,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We reject the City’s argument that probable cause justified [518]*518the arrest as a matter of law because the facts giving rise to the arrest are disputed (compare, Kramer v City of New York, 173 AD2d 155). It was therefore proper for the jury to decide whether the complaint and subsequent investigation gave the officer probable cause to effect the warrantless arrests.

Finally, we find that the jury charge on probable cause was adequate. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.), entered September 22, 1992, which, upon a jury verdict, found that plaintiffs were falsely arrested and awarded each plaintiff $50,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We reject the City’s argument that probable cause justified [518]*518the arrest as a matter of law because the facts giving rise to the arrest are disputed (compare, Kramer v City of New York, 173 AD2d 155). It was therefore proper for the jury to decide whether the complaint and subsequent investigation gave the officer probable cause to effect the warrantless arrests.

Finally, we find that the jury charge on probable cause was adequate. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 A.D.2d 517, 606 N.Y.S.2d 688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abrahante-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack