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.
Marc MUNIZ, etc., et al., Respondents, v. WARWICK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant, et al., Defendant.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Warwick School District appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), dated June 29, 2001, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The infant plaintiff Marc Muniz was voluntarily participating in a softball game during a physical education class at Warwick High School. He was the “on-deck” batter when he was struck in the head by a baseball bat that was released by a fellow student, the defendant Mitchell Jacobson, after hitting the ball. The defendant Warwick School District (hereinafter the District) subsequently moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it on the ground that the infant plaintiff assumed the risk of injury by voluntarily participating in the softball game. The Supreme Court denied the motion. We affirm.
The District correctly contends that being struck in the head by a bat is a risk inherent in the sport of softball (see Morgan v. State of New York, 90 N.Y.2d 471, 662 N.Y.S.2d 421, 685 N.E.2d 202; Checchi v. Socorro, 169 A.D.2d 807, 565 N.Y.S.2d 175; Marlowe v. Rush-Henrietta Cent. School Dist., 167 A.D.2d 820, 561 N.Y.S.2d 934, affd. 78 N.Y.2d 1096, 578 N.Y.S.2d 872, 586 N.E.2d 55). However, after the District made out a prima facie case for summary judgment, the plaintiffs' expert and eyewitness affidavits raised questions of fact as to whether the risk of injury was unreasonably increased by the failure of the District's physical education teacher, who was supervising the game, to issue helmets to the players and to direct them regarding a safe place to stand on a field lacking fences, on-deck circles, or dugouts (see Stryker v. Jericho Union Free School Dist., 244 A.D.2d 330, 663 N.Y.S.2d 868; Baker v. Briarcliff School Dist., 205 A.D.2d 652, 613 N.Y.S.2d 660; Parisi v. Harpursville Cent. School Dist., 160 A.D.2d 1079, 553 N.Y.S.2d 566).
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: April 29, 2002
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)