Clapman v. City of New York
| Decision Date | 05 July 1984 |
| Citation | 63 N.Y.2d 669,479 N.Y.S.2d 515,468 N.E.2d 697 |
| Parties | , 468 N.E.2d 697 David CLAPMAN et al., Appellants, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents. (And Two Third-Party Actions.) |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division, 97 A.D.2d 990, 469 N.Y.S.2d 832, should be affirmed, with costs.
This is an action to recover for personal injuries suffered by appellant David Clapman, who in July 1977 was struck by a foul ball while sitting in the box seat area of Yankee Stadium behind the Yankee dugout. Appellants (Clapman and his wife) allege that respondents (the stadium owner, its lessee and operator, its architect, and its vending concessionaire) were negligent in: (1) not extending the protective screen behind home plate to the area where Clapman was seated; (2) providing insufficient seating behind the existing screen; and (3) allowing Clapman's view of the play to be obstructed by vendors who moved about the aisles during the game.
Respondents' motions for summary judgment were properly granted. Appellants failed to raise any issue of material fact concerning a failure to erect a screen providing adequate protection in the area behind home plate, where the danger of being hit by foul balls is greatest, or to provide sufficient seats behind the screen to accommodate as many spectators as reasonably may be expected to desire such seating. In such circumstances there is no breach of duty by respondents. (Davidoff v. Metropolitan Baseball Club, 61 N.Y.2d 996, 475 N.Y.S.2d 367, 463 N.E.2d 1219; Akins v. Glens Falls City School Dist., 53 N.Y.2d 325, 441 N.Y.S.2d 644, 424 N.E.2d 531.) Appellants' additional allegation that Clapman's view of the foul ball that hit him was obstructed by stadium vendors is contradicted by his own deposition testimony, and in any event fails to raise any issue requiring a trial. Given the location of the vendors and of Clapman's seat, and our prior decisions in Davidoff and Akins, respondents had no duty to insure that vendors moving about in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Turcotte v. Fell
...(see, Davidoff v. Metropolitan Baseball Club, 61 N.Y.2d 996, 997, 475 N.Y.S.2d 367, 463 N.E.2d 1219; Clapman v. City of New York, 63 N.Y.2d 669, 479 N.Y.S.2d 515, 468 N.E.2d 697; Akins v. Glens Falls City School Dist., 53 N.Y.2d 325, 329, 441 N.Y.S.2d 644, 424 N.E.2d 531, supra [duty owed b......
-
Lowe v. California League of Prof. Baseball
...of the doctrine of the primary assumption of the risk; and (2) its reliance on a New York case, Clapman v. City of New York (1984) 63 N.Y.2d 669, 479 N.Y.S.2d 515, 468 N.E.2d 697. In responding to the appeal, defendants rely on a collection of cases which are readily distinguishable on thei......
-
Coronel v. Chicago White Sox, Ltd.
...903.) The most dangerous part of a ball park is universally recognized as the area behind home plate. Clapman v. City of New York (1984), 63 N.Y.2d 669, 479 N.Y.S.2d 515, 468 N.E.2d 697; City of Atlanta v. Merritt (1984), 172 Ga.App. 470, 323 S.E.2d 680; Akins v. Glens Falls City School Dis......
-
Lawson By and Through Lawson v. Salt Lake Trappers, Inc.
...230 Ill.App.3d 734, 171 Ill.Dec. 917, 919, 595 N.E.2d 45, 47 (1992); Bellezzo, 851 P.2d at 852; Clapman v. City of New York, 63 N.Y.2d 669, 479 N.Y.S.2d 515, 516, 468 N.E.2d 697, 698 (1984); Akins, 441 N.Y.S.2d at 646, 424 N.E.2d at 533. Other jurisdictions have followed variations of the m......