Reset A A Font size: Print

Keyon WILLIAMS, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Defendant–Respondent.

Decided: June 18, 2013

ANDRIAS, J.P., FRIEDMAN, MOSKOWITZ, DeGRASSE, FEINMAN, JJ. Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & De Cicco, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for appellant. Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York (Patrick J. Lawless of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Donna M. Mills, J.), entered June 8, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record demonstrates that dismissal of the complaint was appropriate in this action where plaintiff was injured when, while playing basketball on an outdoor court, he tripped and fell over a large and highly visible crack on the court. Plaintiff was an experienced player and was aware that the subject court, where he had played on numerous occasions, had cracks. Under these circumstances, the motion court properly applied the assumption of risk doctrine because plaintiff was involved in an athletic activity at a designated venue and was aware of the perfectly obvious risk of playing on the cracked court (see e.g. Judge v. The City of New York, 101 AD3d 560 [1st Dept 2012]; LaSalvia v. City of New York, 305 A.D.2d 267 [1st Dept 2003] ).