R.L. v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.
Decision Date | 07 August 2019 |
Docket Number | 2018-07948,Index No. 714347/16 |
Citation | 175 A.D.3d 477,106 N.Y.S.3d 155 |
Parties | R.L., etc., et al., Appellants, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, et al., Respondents. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Scott Baron & Associates, P.C., Howard Beach, N.Y. (Michael Stieglitz of counsel), for appellants.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Fay Ng and Diana Lawless of counsel), for respondents.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
In January 2016, the then–14–year–old infant plaintiff was a member of a student dance group that was intending to perform at an upcoming festival at her high school. The school provided times for the group to practice after classes, within the school building, with staff supervision. On January 18, 2016, the school was closed for a public holiday, and the infant plaintiff and the other students in her group met to practice off school grounds, without school staff supervision. During this practice, the infant plaintiff was injured. The infant plaintiff, and her father suing derivatively, commenced this action against the defendants, New York City Department of Education (hereinafter the Department of Education) and the City of New York, alleging negligent supervision. The defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and the Supreme Court granted the motion. The plaintiffs appeal from so much of the order as granted that branch of the defendants' motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the Department of Education. We affirm insofar as appealed from.
Schools have a duty to adequately supervise students in their charge and will be held liable for foreseeable injuries proximately related to the absence of adequate supervision (see Mirand v. City of New York, 84 N.Y.2d 44, 49, 614 N.Y.S.2d 372, 637 N.E.2d 263 ). The duty arises from the school's physical custody over the students (see Pratt v. Robinson, 39 N.Y.2d 554, 560, 384 N.Y.S.2d 749, 349 N.E.2d 849 ). "The rationale underlying this duty is that when a school takes custody of a child, it deprives the child of the protection of his or her parents or guardian, and thus must give the child the protection of which the child has been deprived" ( Begley v. City of New York, 111 A.D.3d 5, 23, 972 N.Y.S.2d 48 ). ( Pratt v. Robinson, 39 N.Y.2d at 560, 384 N.Y.S.2d 749, 349 N.E.2d 849 ; see Stephenson v. City of New York, 19 N.Y.3d 1031, 1034, 954...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Yonghong Xia v. Zhao Xian Zeng
...[internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Gaston v Vertsberger, 176 A.D.3d 919, 920; R.L. v New York City Dept. of Educ., 175 A.D.3d 477, 479). "'The mere hope or speculation that evidence sufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment may be uncovered during the discovery p......
-
Farquharson v. United Parcel Serv.
...L.Ed.2d 694 ), are raised for the first time in reply on appeal and are not properly before the Court (see R.L. v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 175 A.D.3d 477, 479, 106 N.Y.S.3d 155 ). The Supreme Court also properly granted those branches of the separate motions of the UPS defendants and ......
-
Farquharson v. United Parcel Serv.
... ... (Silverstein v New York City Police Dept., 167 ... A.D.3d 961, 963 [internal quotation marks omitted]) ... v New ... York City Dept. of Educ., 175 A.D.3d 477, 479) ... The ... Supreme Court ... ...
- Ji Hae Kim v. Quintanilla