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

This text of 308 A.D.2d 509 (Harris v. Rector Church Wardens & Vestrymen of Christ Church) 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
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).

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]*510the 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

Related

Mirand v. City of New York
637 N.E.2d 263 (New York Court of Appeals, 1994)
Bielicki v. T.J. Bentey, Inc.
267 A.D.2d 266 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Morgan v. Pascal
274 A.D.2d 561 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Jennings v. Oceanside Union Free School District
279 A.D.2d 507 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Lopez v. Freeport Union Free School District
288 A.D.2d 355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
308 A.D.2d 509, 764 N.Y.S.2d 844, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-rector-church-wardens-vestrymen-of-christ-church-nyappdiv-2003.