SHC MG 25 DOE v. New York Athletic Club of the City of New York, Defendant–Appellant. (2024)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alexander M. Tisch, J.), entered February 2, 2023, which denied defendant New York Athletic Club of the City of New York's (N.Y.AC) motion to dismiss the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff alleges that he was sexually abused by his parish priest when the priest took plaintiff and other minors to NYAC in 1975.  Plaintiff was approximately 13 years old at the time.  Plaintiff alleges that defendants, including NYAC, knew or should have known of the priest's predatory behavior.  While NYAC argues that plaintiff fails to allege specific facts that it had notice of the priest's pedophilia, at this pre-discovery stage these allegations sufficed to put NYAC on notice of his claim, particularly that it knew or should have known about the priest's predatory conduct while at NYAC's facilities (see generally G.T. v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, N.Y., 211 A.D.3d 413, 180 N.Y.S.3d 75 [1st Dept. 2022];  Doe v. Intercontinental Hotels Group, PLC, 193 A.D.3d 410, 146 N.Y.S.3d 247 [1st Dept. 2021]).  Given the lengthy elapse of time from the alleged sexual assault, and the age of plaintiff at the time of the alleged assault, information concerning notice may be in the sole possession and control of NYAC (see Ark265 Doe v. Archdiocese of New York, 221 A.D.3d 422, 199 N.Y.S.3d 473 [1st Dept. 2023]).

We have considered NYAC's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.