The complaint alleging false arrest and imprisonment was properly dismissed since defendants met their burden to demonstrate that plaintiff's arrest as well as his ensuing pre-arraignment incarceration, were supported by probable cause (see, Broughton v. State of New York, 37 N.Y.2d 451, cert denied sub nom. Schanbarger v. Kellogg, 423 U.S. 929; Shapiro v. County of Nassau, 202 A.D.2d 358, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 760). In this connection, the record sufficiently establishes that plaintiff, while operating his vehicle, was observed by the arresting officers at a toll booth area waiting to pay his toll; that he appeared to the officers to be unsteady and confused, and smelled of alcohol; and that his face appeared flushed and his eyes, watery and bloodshot. In addition, while plaintiff was still in the toll plaza, two other cars pulled into the plaza, and the drivers of those vehicles informed the officers that their cars had been struck by plaintiff's automobile and that plaintiff, subsequent to the vehicular contact, had failed to stop. Under these circumstances, the officers were amply justified in arresting defendant.
We have considered plaintiff's other arguments and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.