From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Farino v. Cassiere

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 19, 1999
260 A.D.2d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

April 19, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, under the facts of this case, the trial court did not err in refusing his request to charge the jury on the provisions of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1126 (a) ( see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1120 [a] [2], [3]; cf., Baldwin v. Degenhardt, 189 A.D.2d 941, revd on dissenting mem at the App. Div. 82 N.Y.2d 867). Even if the jury found that the defendant had violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1126 (a), no reasonable view of the evidence could support the conclusion that such violation was a proximate cause of the accident ( see, Cranston v. Oxford Resources Corp., 173 A.D.2d 757, 758-759; Koperda v. Town of Whitestown, 224 A.D.2d 944, 945).

The plaintiff's remaining contention is not preserved for appellate review ( see, Chazon v. Parkway Med. Group, 168 A.D.2d 660).

Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Farino v. Cassiere

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 19, 1999
260 A.D.2d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Farino v. Cassiere

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS FARINO, Appellant, v. JOSEPH CASSIERE, JR., Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 19, 1999

Citations

260 A.D.2d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
688 N.Y.S.2d 245

Citing Cases

Solomon v. Green Bay Sanitation Corp.

We agree with the Supreme Court's determination declining the plaintiff's request to charge the jury on the…

Lisa v. N.Y. State Dep't of Motor Vehicles

The statement in the supplemental police accident report that the decedent's alcohol intoxication contributed…