Case Name: William McAndrews et al., Respondents, v. City of New York et al., Appellants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2003-09-16
Citations: 100 N.Y.2d 603
Docket Number: 
Parties: William McAndrews et al., Respondents, v City of New York et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 100
Pages: 603–605

Head Matter:
[801 NE2d 371, 769 NYS2d 151]
William McAndrews et al., Respondents, v City of New York et al., Appellants.
Decided September 16, 2003
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Ellen Ravitch of counsel), for appellants.
Kuharski & Levitz, LLP, New York City (Lonny R. Levitz of counsel), for respondents.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the matter remitted for a new trial.
Despite defendant's timely request, the trial court did not adequately charge the jury concerning the standard of conduct actionable under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1104 (e). The statutory recklessness standard is exacting (see Saarinen v Kerr, 84 NY2d 494, 501-502 [1994]) and the court's failure to define that standard for the jury was not harmless error under the circumstances of this case.
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo and Read concur in memorandum.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order reversed, etc.