DOREN v. [And a Third-Party Action.] (2026)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Mary V. Rosado, J.), entered on or about May 2, 2025, which, to the extent appealed from, granted the motion of defendant New Lounge 4324 LLC, d/b/a Bounce Sporting Club (New Lounge) for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's claims against it for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention and negligence, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

New Lounge was entitled to dismissal of plaintiff's claim for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention because plaintiff failed to establish that New Lounge took any steps to transform Allstar's security guards from independent contractors into special employees (see McLaughlan v. BR Guest, Inc., 149 AD3d 519, 520 [1st Dept 2017] ).  Moreover, even if New Lounge had exercised more than general supervisory powers over Allstar's guards, the record is devoid of evidence indicating that New Lounge was on notice of any “propensity to engage in ․ injury-causing conduct” by Allstar's guards (cf.  Gupta v. YM Pro Corp, 220 AD3d 442, 442 [1st Dept 2023] ).

The negligence claim was correctly dismissed because the record demonstrates that plaintiff was assaulted by a random pedestrian who approached and shoved plaintiff and plaintiff's acquaintance, after they had both been escorted out of the bar operated by New Lounge shortly before the altercation.  There is no indication that New Lounge was on notice of a potential fight, and the pedestrian was not a patron of the bar at the time.  Given these facts, the assault was unforeseeable from New Lounge's perspective (see Mitchell v. Just Lorraine's Place, LLC, 214 AD3d 538, 538 [1st Dept 2023] ).  Plaintiff's expert's affidavit did not raise an issue of fact as to whether New Lounge was negligent, as it failed to reference “specific, applicable industry standards or practices” (Coyle v. Dos–Santos, 231 AD3d 573, 574 [1st Dept 2024] ).