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.
Leah M. KNIGHTNER, etc., et al., respondents, v. WILLIAM FLOYD UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT, appellant.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Whelan, J.), dated July 24, 2007, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.
The infant plaintiff and her mother commenced this action against the defendant school district after the infant plaintiff was injured while playing dodge ball in gym class. The injury occurred when the infant plaintiff stepped backwards and tripped over another student's foot during the course of the game. The defendant's motion for summary judgment was denied by the Supreme Court on the ground that there were triable questions of fact as to whether the infant plaintiff's gym teacher provided adequate supervision. We reverse.
The defendant met its prima facie burden by demonstrating that the incident occurred so quickly that even the most intense supervision could not have averted the accident (see Mayer v. Mahopac Cent. School Dist., 29 A.D.3d 653, 654, 815 N.Y.S.2d 189; Lopez v. Freeport Union Free School Dist., 288 A.D.2d 355, 734 N.Y.S.2d 97; Convey v. City of Rye School Dist., 271 A.D.2d 154, 160, 710 N.Y.S.2d 641).
In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see David v. County of Suffolk, 1 N.Y.3d 525, 526, 775 N.Y.S.2d 229, 807 N.E.2d 278; Ronan v. School Dist. of City of New Rochelle, 35 A.D.3d 429, 825 N.Y.S.2d 249; Wuest v. Board of Educ. of Middle Country Cent. School Dist., 298 A.D.2d 578, 749 N.Y.S.2d 64; Sangineto v. Mamaroneck Union Free School Dist., 282 A.D.2d 596, 723 N.Y.S.2d 234; Checchia v. Port Wash. U.F.S.D., 253 A.D.2d 839, 678 N.Y.S.2d 367). Accordingly, the defendant's motion for summary judgment should have been granted.
In view of the foregoing, we need not reach the plaintiffs' remaining contentions.
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: May 20, 2008
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)