BLAIR v. Erie County Federation of Snowmobile Clubs, Inc., Defendant-Respondent. (2003)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Terry BLAIR, Administratrix of the Estate of Christopher Blair, Deceased, Robert A. Przesiek, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Dean R. Przesiek, Deceased, and on Behalf of Distributee Tyler Przesiek, an Infant, Anthony J. Falter, Jr., and Deborah Falter, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NEWSTEAD SNOWSEEKERS, INC., Doing Business as Northern Erie Sno-Seekers, et al., Defendants, Erie County Federation of Snowmobile Clubs, Inc., Defendant-Respondent.

Decided: May 02, 2003

PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., PINE, HURLBUTT, LAWTON and HAYES, JJ.

Napier, Fitzgerald & Kirby, Buffalo (Brian P. Fitzgerald of Counsel), for Plaintiff-Appellant Terry Blair, Administratrix of the Estate of Christopher Blair, Deceased. Hall, Ricketts, Marky & Gurbacki, East Aurora (Michelle S. Bullock of Counsel), for Plaintiff-Appellant Robert A. Przesiek, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Dean R. Przesiek, Deceased, and on Behalf of Distributee Tyler Przesiek, an Infant. Paul William Beltz, P.C., Buffalo (Debra A. Norton of Counsel), for Plaintiffs-Appellants Anthony J. Falter, Jr., and Deborah Falter. Brown & Kelly, LLP, Buffalo (Andrew D. Merrick of Counsel), for Defendant-Respondent.

Supreme Court properly granted the motion of defendant Erie County Federation of Snowmobile Clubs, Inc. (Federation) for summary judgment dismissing the complaints and cross claims against it. It is the function of the court, in the first instance, to determine whether a defendant owes a duty to a plaintiff (see Darby v. Compagnie Natl. Air France, 96 N.Y.2d 343, 347, 728 N.Y.S.2d 731, 753 N.E.2d 160). Under the facts and circumstances of this case, we conclude that the Federation owed no duty to plaintiffs because it lacked authority or control over the design, maintenance or safety of the trail on which one plaintiff was injured and two plaintiffs' decedents were killed. The Federation therefore was under no duty to ensure a safe design or to warn of any hazards on the trail, and “no jury question of negligence is presented under the facts of this case” (Darby, 96 N.Y.2d at 350, 728 N.Y.S.2d 731, 753 N.E.2d 160; see Hirsch v. Rule, 249 A.D.2d 966, 671 N.Y.S.2d 392). The contention of plaintiffs that they relied upon the Federation to ensure the safety of the trail is raised for the first time on appeal and thus is not properly before us (see Ciesinski v. Town of Aurora, 202 A.D.2d 984, 985, 609 N.Y.S.2d 745). In any event, the record is devoid of evidence of such reliance.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network