Meyer v. Magalios
| Decision Date | 27 March 2019 |
| Docket Number | 2017–02913,Index No. 14505/13 |
| Citation | 170 A.D.3d 1163,97 N.Y.S.3d 265 |
| Parties | Christopher George MEYER, et al., Respondents, v. John MAGALIOS, et al., Defendants, Lindenhurst Union Free School District, etc., Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
170 A.D.3d 1163
97 N.Y.S.3d 265
Christopher George MEYER, et al., Respondents,
v.
John MAGALIOS, et al., Defendants,
Lindenhurst Union Free School District, etc., Appellant.
2017–02913
Index No. 14505/13
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Argued - December 7, 2018
March 27, 2019
Congdon, Flaherty, O'Callaghan, Reid, Donlon, Travis & Fishlinger, Uniondale, N.Y. (Christine Gasser of counsel), for appellant.
Wagner, Doman & Leto, P.C., Mineola, N.Y. (Salvatore J. Leto of counsel), for respondents.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Lindenhurst Union Free School District, also sued herein as Lindenhurst Public Schools and Lindenhurst High School, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (James Hudson, J.), dated January 30, 2017. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied that branch of the motion of the defendant Lindenhurst Union Free School District, also sued herein as Lindenhurst Public Schools and Lindenhurst
High School, which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it by the plaintiffs Christopher George Meyer and Dawn Marie Meyer.
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the motion of the defendant Lindenhurst Union Free School District, also sued
herein as Lindenhurst Public Schools and Lindenhurst High School, which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it by the plaintiffs Christopher George Meyer and Dawn Marie Meyer is granted.
On April 23, 2012, when the plaintiff Christopher George Meyer (hereinafter the injured plaintiff) was in the 11th grade, he allegedly was assaulted by a fellow classmate, who was in the 12th grade, during an incident which lasted approximately 20 to 30 seconds. The incident occurred while the two boys were in a classroom, during the start of their fifth period class at Lindenhurst High School, after the injured plaintiff walked by the other student and called him "fat." When the incident began, the classroom teacher was standing in the hallway ushering other students into the classroom and/or conversing with another teacher.
The plaintiffs commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries. They asserted a cause of action alleging negligent supervision, among other things, against the defendant Lindenhurst Union Free School District, also sued herein as Lindenhurst Public Schools and Lindenhurst High School (hereinafter the School District). The School District moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and the Supreme Court denied the motion, except with respect to the causes of action asserted against the School District by the plaintiff William Meyer. The School District appeals.
The School District established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the cause of action alleging negligent supervision. "Schools have a duty to adequately supervise the students in their care, and may be held liable for foreseeable injuries proximately related to the absence of adequate supervision" ( Timothy Mc. v. Beacon City Sch. Dist., 127 A.D.3d 826, 827, 7 N.Y.S.3d 348 ; see Brandy B. v. Eden Cent. School Dist., 15 N.Y.3d 297, 907 N.Y.S.2d 735, 934 N.E.2d 304 ; Sacino v. Warwick Val. Cent. Sch. Dist., 138 A.D.3d 717, 29 N.Y.S.3d 57 ; Nevaeh T. v. City of New York, 132 A.D.3d 840, 841, 18 N.Y.S.3d 415 ). "The standard for determining whether the school has breached its duty is to compare the school's supervision and protection to that of a parent of ordinary prudence placed in the same situation and armed with the same information" ( Timothy Mc. v. Beacon City Sch. Dist., 127 A.D.3d at 828, 7 N.Y.S.3d 348 ; see Mirand v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Doe v. Poly Prep Country Day Sch.
...WL 273067, at *6 (quoting Mirand , 84 N.Y.2d at 49, 614 N.Y.S.2d 372, 637 N.E.2d 263 ); see also, e.g. , Meyer v. Magalios , 170 A.D.3d 1163, 1164, 97 N.Y.S.3d 265 (2d Dep't 2019).16 As for Defendants’ breach, "[t]he standard to determine whether the school has breached its duty [to student......
-
Lax v. City University of New York
...quoting Mazzilli v. City of New York , 154 A.D.2d 355, 357, 545 N.Y.S.2d 833 [2d Dept. 1989] ; see also Meyer v. Magalios , 170 A.D.3d 1163, 1166, 97 N.Y.S.3d 265 [2d Dept. 2019] ; O'Connor v. Huntington U.F.S.D. , 87 A.D.3d 571, 571, 929 N.Y.S.2d 743 [2d Dept. 2011] ; Semprini v. Village o......
- People v. Croom
-
Millett v. Brookhaven-Comsewogue Union Free Sch. Dist.
...of. . . plaintiffs injuries" (Wienclaw v East Islip Union Free Sch. Dist, supra at 947, 144 N.Y.S.3d at 109, quoting Meyer v Magalios, 170 A.D.3d 1163, 1165,97 N.Y.S.3d 265, 268 [2d Dept 2019]; see Brown v South Country Cent Sch. Dist, 137 A.D.3d 732, 25 N.Y.S.3d 675 [2d Dept 2016]; Braun v......