Cadieux v. Board of Education of City School District

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cadieux v. Board of Education of City School District

25 A.D.2d 579, 266 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5016

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 8, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 25 A.D.2d 579 (Cadieux v. Board of Education of City School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cadieux v. Board of Education of City School District, 25 A.D.2d 579, 266 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5016 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Reynolds, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Schenectady County, granting respondent’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212. From the complaint and testimony elicited at a pretrial examination held pursuant [580]*580to section 50-h of the General Municipal Law it appears that on November 9, 1964 Donna Cadieux, then a 17-year-old high school student, was injured when participants in a football game she was watching left the marked field during the course of play. At the time of the incident Miss Cadieux was viewing the game from the sidelines, although she was aware participants occasionally left the field of play and seats in adjacent bleachers were available. It is well settled that a spectator at a sporting event assumes the obvious and necessary risks incidental to the game, especially where he chooses to sit at an unsafe place despite the availability of protected seating (baseball: Robert v. Deposit Cent. School Dist., 18 A D 2d 947, affd. 13 N Y 2d 709; Baker v. Topping, 15 A D 2d 193, mot. for lv. to app. den. 11 N Y 2d 644; Zeitz v. Cooperstown Baseball Centennial, 31 Misc 2d 142; Adonnino v. Village of Mount Morris, 171 Misc. 383; Blackball v. Albany Baseball & Amusement Co., 157 Misc. 801; hockey: Ingersoll v. Onondaga Hockey Club, 245 App. Div. 137; Hammel v. Madison Sq. Garden Corp., 156 Misc. 311, and even a game of stieckball: Lutzker v. Board of Educ. of City of N. Y., 262 App. Div. 881, affd. 287 N. Y. 822), and the same rationale applies to a football game. The fact that Miss Cadieux was then 17 does not affect the applicability of the above rule to the instant case (Robert v. Deposit Cent. School Dist., supra; Adonnino v. Village of Mount Morris, supra; Lutzker v. Board of Educ. of City of N. Y., supra). We find no merit in the additional contentions advanced by appellants. Order affirmed, without costs.

Gibson, P. J., Taylor, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

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

Reynolds, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Schenectady County, granting respondent’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212. From the complaint and testimony elicited at a pretrial examination held pursuant [580]*580to section 50-h of the General Municipal Law it appears that on November 9, 1964 Donna Cadieux, then a 17-year-old high school student, was injured when participants in a football game she was watching left the marked field during the course of play. At the time of the incident Miss Cadieux was viewing the game from the sidelines, although she was aware participants occasionally left the field of play and seats in adjacent bleachers were available. It is well settled that a spectator at a sporting event assumes the obvious and necessary risks incidental to the game, especially where he chooses to sit at an unsafe place despite the availability of protected seating (baseball: Robert v. Deposit Cent. School Dist., 18 A D 2d 947, affd. 13 N Y 2d 709; Baker v. Topping, 15 A D 2d 193, mot. for lv. to app. den. 11 N Y 2d 644; Zeitz v. Cooperstown Baseball Centennial, 31 Misc 2d 142; Adonnino v. Village of Mount Morris, 171 Misc. 383; Blackball v. Albany Baseball & Amusement Co., 157 Misc. 801; hockey: Ingersoll v. Onondaga Hockey Club, 245 App. Div. 137; Hammel v. Madison Sq. Garden Corp., 156 Misc. 311, and even a game of stieckball: Lutzker v. Board of Educ. of City of N. Y., 262 App. Div. 881, affd. 287 N. Y. 822), and the same rationale applies to a football game. The fact that Miss Cadieux was then 17 does not affect the applicability of the above rule to the instant case (Robert v. Deposit Cent. School Dist., supra; Adonnino v. Village of Mount Morris, supra; Lutzker v. Board of Educ. of City of N. Y., supra). We find no merit in the additional contentions advanced by appellants. Order affirmed, without costs.

Gibson, P. J., Taylor, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 579, 266 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5016, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cadieux-v-board-of-education-of-city-school-district-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack