FOTIADIS v. YM YWHA (2008)

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Elliot, J.), entered November 8, 2006, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Samuel Field YM and YWHA which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

 After his dismissal from middle school on April 16, 2004, the infant plaintiff disregarded his mother's instructions to attend the after-school program run by the defendant Samuel Field YM and YWHA (hereinafter the Y) and went directly to a park, where he fell from a swing and fractured his right leg.

 A school's duty to adequately supervise a student is “coextensive” with its physical custody of and control over the student (Pratt v. Robinson, 39 N.Y.2d 554, 560, 384 N.Y.S.2d 749, 349 N.E.2d 849;  see Chalen v. Glen Cove School Dist., 29 A.D.3d 508, 509, 814 N.Y.S.2d 254;  Ramo v. Serrano, 301 A.D.2d 640, 754 N.Y.S.2d 336;  Bowers v. City of New York, 294 A.D.2d 526, 742 N.Y.S.2d 659).   The Y established its entitlement to summary judgment by demonstrating that the infant plaintiff was injured when he was beyond the “orbit” of its authority (see Pratt v. Robinson, 39 N.Y.2d at 560, 384 N.Y.S.2d 749, 349 N.E.2d 849), and that the Y's failure to notify the infant's mother that the infant plaintiff was not attending the after-school program was not the proximate cause of his injuries (see generally Derdiarian v. Felix Contr. Corp., 51 N.Y.2d 308, 434 N.Y.S.2d 166, 414 N.E.2d 666).   In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact.   Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the Y's motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it (see Chalen v. Glen Cove School Dist., 29 A.D.3d 508, 814 N.Y.S.2d 254;  Ramo v. Serrano, 301 A.D.2d 640, 754 N.Y.S.2d 336).

The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.