Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Susan LINK, etc., et al., appellants, v. QUOGUE UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT, respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated February 8, 2006, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Schools have a duty to provide supervision to ensure the safety of students in their charge, and they will be held liable for the foreseeable injuries proximately caused by the absence of adequate supervision (see Mirand v. City of New York, 84 N.Y.2d 44, 49, 614 N.Y.S.2d 372, 637 N.E.2d 263; Eberwein v. Newburgh Enlarged City School Dist., 31 A.D.3d 492, 818 N.Y.S.2d 255; Oldham v. Eastport Union Free School Dist., 26 A.D.3d 480, 809 N.Y.S.2d 461). However, “where an accident occurs in so short a span of time that even the most intense supervision could not have prevented it, any lack of supervision is not the proximate cause of the injury and summary judgment in favor of the [defendant school] is warranted” (Convey v. Rye School Dist., 271 A.D.2d 154, 160, 710 N.Y.S.2d 641; see Eberwein v. Newburgh Enlarged City School Dist., supra; Hernandez v. Board of Educ. of the City of N.Y., 302 A.D.2d 493, 755 N.Y.S.2d 253; Janukajtis v. Fallon, 284 A.D.2d 428, 726 N.Y.S.2d 451).
Here, the defendant, Quogue Union Free School District, established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence that the incident which allegedly caused the infant plaintiff to sustain psychological trauma occurred in so short a period of time that its alleged failure to provide adequate supervision was not a proximate cause of his injuries. In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise an issue of fact (see Eberwein v. Newburgh Enlarged City School Dist., supra; Convey v. Rye School Dist., supra; Hernandez v. Board of Educ. of the City of N.Y., supra; Janukajtis v. Fallon, supra; Totan v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 133 A.D.2d 366, 519 N.Y.S.2d 374). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the School District's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 20, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)