Daniel B. Primeau v Town of Amherst

Primeau v Town of Amherst 2005 NY Slip Op 07866 [5 NY3d 844] October 27, 2005 Court of Appeals Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, January 4, 2006

[*1] Daniel B. Primeau, Appellant,
v
Town of Amherst et al., Respondents.

Decided October 27, 2005

Primeau v Town of Amherst, 17 AD3d 1003, affirmed.

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Webster Szanyi LLP, Buffalo (Kevin A. Szanyi of counsel), for appellant.

De Marie & Schoenborn, P.C., Buffalo (Joseph De Marie of counsel), for respondents.

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 [*2]permissible inferences to support the 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.