Case Name: Daniel B. Primeau, Appellant, v. Town of Amherst et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2005-10-27
Citations: 5 N.Y.3d 844
Docket Number: 
Parties: Daniel B. Primeau, Appellant, v Town of Amherst et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 844–846

Head Matter:
[840 NE2d 114, 806 NYS2d 145]
Daniel B. Primeau, Appellant, v Town of Amherst et al., Respondents.
Decided October 27, 2005
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:
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 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.