Diderou v. Pinecrest Dunes, Inc.
| Decision Date | 20 April 1970 |
| Citation | 310 N.Y.S.2d 572,34 A.D.2d 672 |
| Parties | Janine DIDEROU, an infant, etc., et al., Appellants, v. PINECREST DUNES, INC., Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Gair, Gair & Conason, New York City, for appellants. Herman Schmertz, New York City, of counsel.
Christensen, Caliendo & Crowley, Julius S. Christensen, New York City, for respondent.
Before CHRIST, P.J., and RABIN, HOPKINS and BRENNAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a negligence and breach of contract action against the operator of a summer camp to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., arising out of the fall from a horse of the infant plaintiff camper, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated July 22, 1969, which granted defendant's motion to vacate plaintiffs' demand for a bill of particulars of the affirmative defense of assumption of risk.
Order modified, on the law and the facts, by striking out everything after the decretal provision that defendant's motion 'is hereby granted' and by adding, immediately after said word 'granted' the following: 'to the extent of striking out items '5' and '6' of the demand and the motion is otherwise denied.' As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. The bill of particulars shall be served within 20 days after entry of the order hereon.
The defense in substance consists of the bare allegation that horseback riding involves unstated inherent dangers of which, upon enrolling, plaintiffs assumed the risk. Items 1 to 4 of the demand pertain to the terms of the infant plaintiff's enrollment upon which the defense is predicated. Items 5 and 6 require defendant to set forth whether plaintiffs, or either of them, were given notice or warning by defendant of the relevant risks and, if so, the substance thereof.
In our opinion, plaintiffs are entitled to particulars respecting items '1' to '4' inclusive. As respects voluntary participation in a sport, the doctrine of assumption of risk applies to any facet of the activity inherent in it and to any open and obvious condition of the place where it is carried on (Hoffman v. Silbert, 24 A.D.2d 493, 261 N.Y.S.2d 494, affd. 19 N.Y.2d 661, 278 N.Y.S.2d 854, 225 N.E.2d 547; Luftig v. Steinhorn, 21 A.D.2d 760, 250 N.Y.S.2d 354, affd. 16 N.Y.2d 568, 260 N.Y.S.2d 840, 208 N.E.2d 784; Lobsenz v. Rubinstein, 258 App.Div. 164, 15 N.Y.S.2d 848, affd. 283 N.Y. 600, 28 N.E.2d 22) and imports a knowledge and awareness of the particular...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Maddox v. City of New York
...facet of the activity inherent in it and to any open and obvious condition of the place where it is carried on" (Diderou v. Pinecrest Dunes, 34 A.D.2d 672, 673, 310 N.Y.S.2d 572) is borne out not only by that case but also by Hoffman v. Silbert, 19 N.Y.2d 661, 278 N.Y.S.2d 854, 225 N.E.2d 5......
-
Maddox v. City of New York
... ... Plaintiffs-Appellants, ... D. Reiner, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant, ... New York Yankees, Third-Party ... denied 42 N.Y.2d 801, 396 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 364 N.E.2d 1345; Diderou v. Pinecrest Dunes, 34 A.D.2d 672, ... 310 N.Y.S.2d 572). Although, as ... ...
-
Rose v. Tee-Bird Golf Club, Inc.
...obvious condition of the place where it is carried on." Maddox v City of New York, 66 N.Y.2d 270, 277 (Nov., 1985), citing Diderou v Pinecrest Duncs, 34 A.D.2d 672 (Second Dept., April, 1970). As concerns the activity of golf in particular, such doctrine has been applied to preclude an acti......
-
O'Brien v. Midtown Skating Club of New York, Inc.
...obvious condition of the place where it is carried on (Curcio v. City of New York, 275 N.Y. 20, 9 N.E.2d 760; Diderou v. Pinecrest Dunes, Inc., 34 A.D.2d 672, 310 N.Y.S.2d 572). However the operator of the facility in which the sporting or athletic activity proceeds owes a duty of care to s......