Martino v. Vonnes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martino v. Vonnes

298 A.D.2d 505, 748 N.Y.S.2d 512, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9923

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 21, 2002·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.), dated December 3, 2001, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiff, an experienced softball player, was injured while playing second base in a league softball game when the defendant slid into him. The plaintiff commenced this action, [506] inter alia, to recover damages for negligence. In his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendant argued that the plaintiff assumed the risk of injury. The Supreme Court denied the motion. We reverse.

The plaintiff, as a voluntary participant in a softball league game, assumed the risk that he might be injured by a sliding opposing player (see Morgan v State of New York, 90 NY2d 471; Turcotte v Fell, 68 NY2d 432; Rosenblatt v Kahn, 245 AD2d 438; Totino v Nassau County Council of Boy Scouts of Am., 213 AD2d 710). Accordingly, the defendant’s motion should have been granted. S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Rivera, 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, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.), dated December 3, 2001, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiff, an experienced softball player, was injured while playing second base in a league softball game when the defendant slid into him. The plaintiff commenced this action, [506] inter alia, to recover damages for negligence. In his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendant argued that the plaintiff assumed the risk of injury. The Supreme Court denied the motion. We reverse.

The plaintiff, as a voluntary participant in a softball league game, assumed the risk that he might be injured by a sliding opposing player (see Morgan v State of New York, 90 NY2d 471; Turcotte v Fell, 68 NY2d 432; Rosenblatt v Kahn, 245 AD2d 438; Totino v Nassau County Council of Boy Scouts of Am., 213 AD2d 710). Accordingly, the defendant’s motion should have been granted. S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Martino v. Vonnes, 298 A.D.2d 505, 748 N.Y.S.2d 512, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9923 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

298 A.D.2d 505 (Martino v. Vonnes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related