Thompson v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Thompson v. State

248 A.D.2d 798, 670 N.Y.S.2d 123, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2243

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

DecidedMarch 5, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 248 A.D.2d 798 (Thompson v. State) 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

Thompson v. State, 248 A.D.2d 798, 670 N.Y.S.2d 123, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2243 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Crew III, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Bell, J.), entered January 9, 1997, upon a decision of the court following a bifurcated trial in favor of the State on the issue of liability.

Following a bifurcated trial on the issue of liability, the Court of Claims dismissed claimants’ claims arising from the high-speed pursuit of claimant Curtis L. Thompson by State Troopers, which resulted in Thompson’s loss of control of his vehicle. Claimants have appealed.

We affirm. Resolution of the underlying claims rested upon the evaluation of sharply conflicting eyewitness testimony, as well as conflicting expert testimony. Based upon our review of the record before us, we see no reason to depart from our long-established practice of deferring to the determination of the trial court on issues of credibility (see, e.g., Slaughter v State of New York, 238 AD2d 770, 772; Matter of Krywanczyk v Krywanczyk, 236 AD2d 746). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been examined and found to be lacking in merit.

[799]*799Cardona, P. J., White, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

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

—Crew III, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Bell, J.), entered January 9, 1997, upon a decision of the court following a bifurcated trial in favor of the State on the issue of liability.

Following a bifurcated trial on the issue of liability, the Court of Claims dismissed claimants’ claims arising from the high-speed pursuit of claimant Curtis L. Thompson by State Troopers, which resulted in Thompson’s loss of control of his vehicle. Claimants have appealed.

We affirm. Resolution of the underlying claims rested upon the evaluation of sharply conflicting eyewitness testimony, as well as conflicting expert testimony. Based upon our review of the record before us, we see no reason to depart from our long-established practice of deferring to the determination of the trial court on issues of credibility (see, e.g., Slaughter v State of New York, 238 AD2d 770, 772; Matter of Krywanczyk v Krywanczyk, 236 AD2d 746). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been examined and found to be lacking in merit.

[799]*799Cardona, P. J., White, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 798, 670 N.Y.S.2d 123, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-v-state-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack