Kilroy v. Tofany

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kilroy v. Tofany

33 A.D.2d 1092, 308 N.Y.S.2d 283, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5543

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

DecidedFebruary 12, 1970

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 33 A.D.2d 1092 (Kilroy v. Tofany) 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

Kilroy v. Tofany, 33 A.D.2d 1092, 308 N.Y.S.2d 283, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5543 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination unanimously annulled with costs. Memorandum: Petitioner was driving a truck about 35 miles per hour in a 50 mile per hour speed zone in a rural area on a two-lane road in the early afternoon on a clear day. A bus, not a school bus, coming from the opposite direction stopped and a 14-year-old girl alighted from it. She proceeded along the right side of the bus to the rear and then out onto petitioner’s side of the road. He sounded his horn, slowed down, tried to stop and skidded. The girl tried to beat him across the road but froze for a split second and stopped, then she commenced to run. While a part of his truck did come in contact with her, there was insufficient substantial evidence to support the determination of the Referee that petitioner failed to use due care in avoiding a collision with a pedestrian in violation of section 1154 of the Vehicle and [1093]*1093Traffic Law. (Review of determination revoking operator’s license, transferred by order of Niagara Special Term.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Del Vecehio, Gabrielli, Moule and Bastow, JJ.

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

Determination unanimously annulled with costs. Memorandum: Petitioner was driving a truck about 35 miles per hour in a 50 mile per hour speed zone in a rural area on a two-lane road in the early afternoon on a clear day. A bus, not a school bus, coming from the opposite direction stopped and a 14-year-old girl alighted from it. She proceeded along the right side of the bus to the rear and then out onto petitioner’s side of the road. He sounded his horn, slowed down, tried to stop and skidded. The girl tried to beat him across the road but froze for a split second and stopped, then she commenced to run. While a part of his truck did come in contact with her, there was insufficient substantial evidence to support the determination of the Referee that petitioner failed to use due care in avoiding a collision with a pedestrian in violation of section 1154 of the Vehicle and [1093]*1093Traffic Law. (Review of determination revoking operator’s license, transferred by order of Niagara Special Term.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Del Vecehio, Gabrielli, Moule and Bastow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 1092, 308 N.Y.S.2d 283, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5543, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kilroy-v-tofany-nyappdiv-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack