Suriano v. Hyde Park Cent. School Dist.
| Decision Date | 25 April 1994 |
| Parties | , 90 Ed. Law Rep. 1163 Jason SURIANO, etc., et al., Respondents, v. HYDE PARK CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Cook, Tucker, Netter & Cloonan, P.C., Kingston (Robert D. Cook, of counsel), for appellant.
Vincent J. Catalano, Jr., Poughkeepsie (Vincent J. Catalano, Jr., of counsel), for respondents.
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and O'BRIEN, GOLDSTEIN and FLORIO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), entered April 15, 1992, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The plaintiffs commenced the instant action to recover for the infant plaintiff's alleged mental and emotional suffering and for his mother's purported expenditures in connection therewith. They essentially alleged that the defendant school district breached a duty of care owed to the infant plaintiff by promoting him from the first grade through the third grade despite his poor academic performance, by failing to detect a purported learning disability of the infant plaintiff, by failing to place him in a special education program to treat his learning disability, and by failing to provide him with a proper education. The defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, contending that the complaint failed to state a legally cognizable cause of action. The Supreme Court denied the motion, finding that the action sounded in ordinary negligence and could be maintained. We reverse.
The record contains sufficient evidentiary material upon which to determine the defendant's motion for summary judgment. Further, it is clear from a review of the pleadings that this action is premised solely on a theory of educational malpractice, notwithstanding the plaintiff's assertions to the contrary (see, Sitomer v. Half Hollow Hills Cent. School Dist., 133 A.D.2d 748, 520 N.Y.S.2d 37; DeRosa v. City of New York, 132 A.D.2d 592, 517 N.Y.S.2d 754). In numerous cases, many of which involved allegations substantially similar to those in the matter at bar, the courts of this State have repeatedly refused to entertain educational malpractice causes of action because public policy precludes judicial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sellers v. School Bd. of the City of Manassas, Virginia
...school system for negligently evaluat[ing] the[ir son's] learning disabilities" could not be maintained); Suriano v. Hyde Park Cent. Sch. Dist., 203 A.D.2d 553, 611 N.Y.S.2d 20 (1994) (dismissing plaintiff's claim that his "school breached a duty of care ... by promoting him from the first ......
-
Page v. Klein Tools, Inc., Docket No. 112464, Calendar No. 4.
...malpractice, 1 A.L.R.4th 1139. 7. See, e.g., Brantley v. Dist. of Columbia, 640 A.2d 181 (D.C., 1994); Suriano v. Hyde Park Central School Dist., 203 A.D.2d 553, 611 N.Y.S.2d 20 (1994); Doe v. Montgomery County Bd. of Ed., 295 Md. 67, 453 A.2d 814 (1982); D.S.W. v. Fairbanks North Star Boro......
-
S.W. by J.W. v. Warren
...of public policy, such a cause of action cannot be entertained by the courts of this State."); Suriano v. Hyde Park Cent. Sch. Dist., 203 A.D.2d 553, 554, 611 N.Y.S.2d 20, 21 (2d Dep't 1994) (determining that plaintiffs allegations that defendant school district breached a duty of care by p......
-
Helbig v. City of New York
...N.E.2d 317; Donohue v. Copiague Union Free School Dist., 47 N.Y.2d 440, 418 N.Y.S.2d 375, 391 N.E.2d 1352; Suriano v. Hyde Park Cent. School Dist., 203 A.D.2d 553, 611 N.Y.S.2d 20). Thus, the provisions of the complaint that allege negligence on the part of the appellants must be As for the......