Guzman v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Guzman v. City of New York

77 A.D.3d 570, 909 N.Y.S.2d 721

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

DecidedOctober 26, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 77 A.D.3d 570 (Guzman v. City of New York) 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

Guzman v. City of New York, 77 A.D.3d 570, 909 N.Y.S.2d 721 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George D. Salerno, J.), entered on or about May 7, 2009, which, insofar as appealed [571]*571from as limited by the briefs, in this action for personal injuries, granted defendant Board of Education’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Dismissal of the complaint was proper in this action where plaintiff, a severely mentally and physically handicapped individual, was injured when a fellow similarly handicapped student bit her index finger. The record establishes that defendant Board of Education had no specific knowledge or notice that the other student’s actions could reasonably have been anticipated (see Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 49 [1994]). Furthermore, the evidence shows that there were one teacher and four paraprofessionals assigned to the subject class that contained ten students and, under the circumstances presented, no amount of supervision could have prevented this sudden incident (see Cranston v Nyack Pub. Schools, 303 AD2d 441 [2003]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Nardelli, Moskowitz and DeGrasse, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George D. Salerno, J.), entered on or about May 7, 2009, which, insofar as appealed [571]*571from as limited by the briefs, in this action for personal injuries, granted defendant Board of Education’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Dismissal of the complaint was proper in this action where plaintiff, a severely mentally and physically handicapped individual, was injured when a fellow similarly handicapped student bit her index finger. The record establishes that defendant Board of Education had no specific knowledge or notice that the other student’s actions could reasonably have been anticipated (see Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 49 [1994]). Furthermore, the evidence shows that there were one teacher and four paraprofessionals assigned to the subject class that contained ten students and, under the circumstances presented, no amount of supervision could have prevented this sudden incident (see Cranston v Nyack Pub. Schools, 303 AD2d 441 [2003]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Nardelli, Moskowitz and DeGrasse, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 A.D.3d 570, 909 N.Y.S.2d 721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/guzman-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack