Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Daniel GLAZIER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KEUKA COLLEGE, Defendant-Respondent.

Decided: September 29, 2000

Present:  GREEN, J.P., HAYES, WISNER, SCUDDER and LAWTON, JJ. Joseph B. Pachura, Jr., Utica, for plaintiff-appellant. Gary H. Abelson, Rochester, for defendant-respondent.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for injuries that he sustained during a tackle football game organized and played by students of two competing residence halls at defendant college.   Supreme Court properly granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.   The record establishes that plaintiff assumed the risk of his injuries as a matter of law (see, Turcotte v. Fell, 68 N.Y.2d 432, 438-441, 510 N.Y.S.2d 49, 502 N.E.2d 964).   Plaintiff, an experienced football player, was aware that “being tackled in a violent manner is an inherent part of football” (Hunt v. Skaneateles Cent. School Dist., 227 A.D.2d 939, 643 N.Y.S.2d 252;  see, Benitez v. New York City Bd. of Educ., 73 N.Y.2d 650, 658-659, 543 N.Y.S.2d 29, 541 N.E.2d 29).   Contrary to plaintiff's contention, the injury-causing tackle did not involve a “flagrant infraction[ ] unrelated to the normal method of playing the game and done without any competitive purpose” that would render inapplicable the doctrine of assumption of risk (Turcotte v. Fell, supra, at 441, 510 N.Y.S.2d 49, 502 N.E.2d 964;  see, Barton v. Hapeman, 251 A.D.2d 1052, 674 N.Y.S.2d 188).

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.


Copied to clipboard