Primeau v. Town of Amherst

Oct 27, 2005

Versions:5 N.Y.3d 844

840 N.E.2d 114

806 N.Y.S.2d 145

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.