Primeau v. Town of Amherst

New York Court of Appeals

Primeau v. Town of Amherst

840 N.E.2d 114, 5 N.Y.3d 844, 806 N.Y.S.2d 145

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 27, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 840 N.E.2d 114 (Primeau v. Town of Amherst) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Primeau v. Town of Amherst, 840 N.E.2d 114, 5 N.Y.3d 844, 806 N.Y.S.2d 145 (N.Y. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

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 *846 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. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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