From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Dumond v. State of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 31, 1999
259 A.D.2d 1033 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

March 31, 1999

Appeal from Judgment of Court of Claims, McNamara, J. — Negligence.


Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The Court of Claims determined that defendant's failure to install a three-light traffic signal at the intersection was not a proximate cause of the accident. That determination is not against the weight of the evidence. The argument of claimants that a different reasonable interpretation of the testimony supports their position is unavailing. "According considerable deference to the findings of the Court of Claims, as is appropriate", we conclude that its determination is fully supported by the record (Morrisseau v. State of New York, 237 A.D.2d 803, 804; see, Zecca v. State of New York, 247 A.D.2d 776). Claimants failed to show that defendant's traffic signal study and decision with regard to the intersection was plainly inadequate or without a reasonable basis (see, Friedman v. State of New York, 67 N.Y.2d 271, 284; see also, Weiss v. Fote, 7 N.Y.2d 579, 588-589, rearg denied 8 N.Y.2d 934).

Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Wisner, Scudder and Callahan, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Dumond v. State of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 31, 1999
259 A.D.2d 1033 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Matter of Dumond v. State of New York

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MICHAEL DUMOND et al., Appellants, v. STATE OF NEW YORK…

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

Date published: Mar 31, 1999

Citations

259 A.D.2d 1033 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
689 N.Y.S.2d 898

Citing Cases

Langner v. State

Thus, while the State has a nondelegable duty to maintain its highways in a reasonably safe condition…