Harris v. Rector Church Wardens & Vestrymen of Christ Church

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Harris v. Rector Church Wardens & Vestrymen of Christ Church

308 A.D.2d 509, 764 N.Y.S.2d 844, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9672

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 22, 2003·Published

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), entered May 1, 2002, which, upon the granting of the motion of the defendant Therapy & Learning Center, Inc., pursuant to CPLR 4401, made at the close of evidence, for judgment as a matter of law dismissing the plaintiffs’ cause of action alleging negligent supervision and upon a jury verdict on the plaintiffs’ cause of action alleging a dangerous and defective condition, is in favor of the defendant Therapy & Learning Center, Inc., and against them dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against that defendant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly directed a verdict in favor of the defendant Therapy & Learning Center, Inc. (hereinafter [510] the defendant), on the plaintiffs’ cause of action alleging negligent supervision. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, no rational jury could have found that a lack of adequate supervision by that defendant was a proximate cause of the injuries alleged (see Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44 [1994]; Lopez v Freeport Union Free School Dist., 288 AD2d 355 [2001]; Jennings v Oceanside Union Free School Dist., 279 AD2d 507 [2001]).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit (see Morgan v Pascal, 274 AD2d 561 [2000]; Bielicki v T.J. Bentey, Inc., 267 AD2d 266 [1999]). Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, H. Miller and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), entered May 1, 2002, which, upon the granting of the motion of the defendant Therapy & Learning Center, Inc., pursuant to CPLR 4401, made at the close of evidence, for judgment as a matter of law dismissing the plaintiffs’ cause of action alleging negligent supervision and upon a jury verdict on the plaintiffs’ cause of action alleging a dangerous and defective condition, is in favor of the defendant Therapy & Learning Center, Inc., and against them dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against that defendant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly directed a verdict in favor of the defendant Therapy & Learning Center, Inc. (hereinafter [510] the defendant), on the plaintiffs’ cause of action alleging negligent supervision. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, no rational jury could have found that a lack of adequate supervision by that defendant was a proximate cause of the injuries alleged (see Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44 [1994]; Lopez v Freeport Union Free School Dist., 288 AD2d 355 [2001]; Jennings v Oceanside Union Free School Dist., 279 AD2d 507 [2001]).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit (see Morgan v Pascal, 274 AD2d 561 [2000]; Bielicki v T.J. Bentey, Inc., 267 AD2d 266 [1999]). Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, H. Miller and Adams, JJ., concur.

Harris v. Rector Church Wardens & Vestrymen of Christ Church, 308 A.D.2d 509, 764 N.Y.S.2d 844, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9672 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

308 A.D.2d 509 (Harris v. Rector Church Wardens & Vestrymen of Christ Church) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related