Baker v. Jewell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baker v. Jewell

229 A.D.2d 924, 646 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8950

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 12, 1996·Published

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The injuries sustained by plaintiff’s daughter were the result of the unanticipated actions of another student. The intervening acts of that student, not the alleged negligence of the attendance officer, were the proximate cause of the injuries sustained by plaintiff’s daughter (see, DeMunda v Niagara Wheatfield Bd. of Educ., 213 AD2d 975; Rock v Central Sq. [925] School Dist., 113 AD2d 1008). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Fallon, Callahan and Davis, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The injuries sustained by plaintiff’s daughter were the result of the unanticipated actions of another student. The intervening acts of that student, not the alleged negligence of the attendance officer, were the proximate cause of the injuries sustained by plaintiff’s daughter (see, DeMunda v Niagara Wheatfield Bd. of Educ., 213 AD2d 975; Rock v Central Sq. [925] School Dist., 113 AD2d 1008). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Fallon, Callahan and Davis, JJ.

Baker v. Jewell, 229 A.D.2d 924, 646 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8950 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

229 A.D.2d 924 (Baker v. Jewell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related