Hansman v. Village of Lynbrook

251 A.D.2d 373, 672 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6626
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 8, 1998·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Feuerstein, J.), dated June 9, 1997, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly concluded that the plaintiff assumed the risks inherent in playing football in the street where he sustained his injuries, including those risks associated with the condition of the playing surface and any open and obvious conditions on it (see, Maddox v City of New York, 66 NY2d 270, 277; Garafola v City of New York, 247 AD2d 581; Reynolds v Jefferson Val. Racquet Club, 238 AD2d 493; Walner v City of New York, 243 AD2d 629; McDaniels v City of New York, 234 AD2d 432; Touti v City of New York, 233 AD2d 496). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Hansman v. Village of Lynbrook, 251 A.D.2d 373, 672 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6626 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

251 A.D.2d 373 (Hansman v. Village of Lynbrook) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Peters v. City of New York
269 A.D.2d 581 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Sheridan v. City of New York
261 A.D.2d 528 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)