STALIKAS v. UNITED MATERIALS, LLC, Appeal No. 1.

CourtNew York Court of Appeals
Citation801 N.E.2d 411,100 N.Y.2d 626,769 N.Y.S.2d 191
Decision Date23 October 2003
PartiesSTEPHEN STALIKAS, JR., et al., Appellants, v. UNITED MATERIALS, L.L.C., et al., Defendants, and MICHAEL DEAKIN, Respondent. STEPHEN STALIKAS, JR., et al., Appellants, v. UNITED MATERIALS, L.L.C., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.
Docket NumberAppeal No. 1.

100 N.Y.2d 626
801 N.E.2d 411
769 N.Y.S.2d 191

STEPHEN STALIKAS, JR., et al., Appellants,
v.
UNITED MATERIALS, L.L.C., et al., Defendants, and MICHAEL DEAKIN, Respondent. (Appeal No. 1.)
STEPHEN STALIKAS, JR., et al., Appellants,
v.
UNITED MATERIALS, L.L.C., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. (Appeal No. 2.)

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.

Decided October 23, 2003.


100 N.Y.2d 627
Law Offices of Eugene C. Tenney, Buffalo (Eric M. Shelton of counsel), for appellants in the first and second above-entitled actions.

Hagelin & Bischof, LLC, Buffalo (Dennis J. Bischof of counsel), for Michael Deakin, respondent in the first and second above-entitled actions.

Law Offices of John Quackenbush, Buffalo (William E. Nitterauer of counsel), for United Materials, L.L.C., and another, respondents in the first and second above-entitled actions.

Before: Chief Judge KAYE and Judges SMITH, CIPARICK, ROSENBLATT, GRAFFEO and READ concur.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

The orders of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

In this action seeking damages for injuries plaintiff suffered in a five-car chain reaction accident, the Appellate Division properly determined that any error by Supreme Court in refusing to charge this jury pursuant to PJI3d 2:26 was harmless. Here, the only statute allegedly violated was Vehicle

100 N.Y.2d 628
and Traffic Law § 1129 (a), which requires that drivers "not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent" under the circumstances. The jury found defendants not negligent under a reasonable and prudent standard as charged by Supreme Court (see CPLR 2001, 2002).

Further, sufficient proof was adduced at trial from which a reasonable jury could infer that defendants were not negligent. Because sufficient evidence in the record exists to support the verdict in defendants' favor, the Appellate Division did not err in declining to disturb it.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), orders affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 practice notes
  • Tenas-Reynard v. Palermo Taxi Inc., 14 Civ. 6974 (PGG)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • March 30, 2016
    ...at 908 (quoting Stalikas v. United Materials, 306 A.D.2d 810, 810 (4th Dept. 2003) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), aff'd 100 N.Y.2d 626, 627-28 (2003)). The "'operator of the moving vehicle [then must] come forward with an adequate non[-]negligent explanation for the a......
  • People v. Reyes
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • November 18, 2016
    ...order was relevant to his 144 A.D.3d 1686credibility (see People v. Yelle, 303 A.D.2d 1043, 1043, 756 N.Y.S.2d 692, lv. denied 100 N.Y.2d 626, 767 N.Y.S.2d 410, 799 N.E.2d 633 ), and we conclude that the court was not required to preclude cross-examination about it even though it was from a......
  • Shaw v. Rosha Enters., Inc., 354 CA 14-01198
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • June 19, 2015
    ...81 A.D.3d 1391, 1392, 917 N.Y.S.2d 463 [emphasis added]; see Stalikas v. United Materials, 306 A.D.2d 810, 811, 760 N.Y.S.2d 804, affd. 100 N.Y.2d 626, 769 N.Y.S.2d 191, 801 N.E.2d 411 ; 129 A.D.3d 1577Arms v. Halsey, 43 A.D.3d 1419, 1419, 842 N.Y.S.2d 847 ; Heffernan v. Logue, 40 A.D.2d 10......
  • Wild v. System
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • June 17, 2011
    ...a substantial right of a party is not prejudiced” ( see e.g. Stalikas v. United Materials, 306 A.D.2d 810, 811, 760 N.Y.S.2d 804, affd. 100 N.Y.2d 626, 769 N.Y.S.2d 191, 801 N.E.2d 411; Murdoch v. Niagara Falls Bridge Commn., 81 A.D.3d 1456, 1457–1458, 917 N.Y.S.2d 501, lv. denied ––– N.Y.3......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
16 cases
  • Tenas-Reynard v. Palermo Taxi Inc., 14 Civ. 6974 (PGG)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • March 30, 2016
    ...at 908 (quoting Stalikas v. United Materials, 306 A.D.2d 810, 810 (4th Dept. 2003) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), aff'd 100 N.Y.2d 626, 627-28 (2003)). The "'operator of the moving vehicle [then must] come forward with an adequate non[-]negligent explanation for the a......
  • People v. Reyes
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • November 18, 2016
    ...order was relevant to his 144 A.D.3d 1686credibility (see People v. Yelle, 303 A.D.2d 1043, 1043, 756 N.Y.S.2d 692, lv. denied 100 N.Y.2d 626, 767 N.Y.S.2d 410, 799 N.E.2d 633 ), and we conclude that the court was not required to preclude cross-examination about it even though it was from a......
  • Shaw v. Rosha Enters., Inc., 354 CA 14-01198
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • June 19, 2015
    ...81 A.D.3d 1391, 1392, 917 N.Y.S.2d 463 [emphasis added]; see Stalikas v. United Materials, 306 A.D.2d 810, 811, 760 N.Y.S.2d 804, affd. 100 N.Y.2d 626, 769 N.Y.S.2d 191, 801 N.E.2d 411 ; 129 A.D.3d 1577Arms v. Halsey, 43 A.D.3d 1419, 1419, 842 N.Y.S.2d 847 ; Heffernan v. Logue, 40 A.D.2d 10......
  • Wild v. System
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • June 17, 2011
    ...a substantial right of a party is not prejudiced” ( see e.g. Stalikas v. United Materials, 306 A.D.2d 810, 811, 760 N.Y.S.2d 804, affd. 100 N.Y.2d 626, 769 N.Y.S.2d 191, 801 N.E.2d 411; Murdoch v. Niagara Falls Bridge Commn., 81 A.D.3d 1456, 1457–1458, 917 N.Y.S.2d 501, lv. denied ––– N.Y.3......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT