Meyers v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Meyers v. Board of Education

260 A.D.2d 557, 688 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4095

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

DecidedApril 19, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 260 A.D.2d 557 (Meyers v. Board of Education) 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

Meyers v. Board of Education, 260 A.D.2d 557, 688 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4095 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bruno, J.), dated November 3, 1997, as denied their cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the cross motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiff, an employee of Brookdale University Hospital, allegedly was assaulted by one of the children in the hospital’s Child Day Treatment Program. The Board of Education provided on-site teachers to give all day instruction to the students of the Child Day Treatment Program. The defendants established that at the time of the alleged assault the infant was not under their custody and control (see, Chainani v Board of Educ., 87 NY2d 370, 378-379). Moreover, absent a special duty to the plaintiff, liability may not be imposed upon a governmental entity for its breach of a duty owed generally to persons in the school system and members of the public (see, Bonner v City of New York, 73 NY2d 930; Vitale v City of New York, 60 NY2d 861, 863; Glick v City of New York, 53 AD2d 528). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman and Florio, 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 defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bruno, J.), dated November 3, 1997, as denied their cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the cross motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiff, an employee of Brookdale University Hospital, allegedly was assaulted by one of the children in the hospital’s Child Day Treatment Program. The Board of Education provided on-site teachers to give all day instruction to the students of the Child Day Treatment Program. The defendants established that at the time of the alleged assault the infant was not under their custody and control (see, Chainani v Board of Educ., 87 NY2d 370, 378-379). Moreover, absent a special duty to the plaintiff, liability may not be imposed upon a governmental entity for its breach of a duty owed generally to persons in the school system and members of the public (see, Bonner v City of New York, 73 NY2d 930; Vitale v City of New York, 60 NY2d 861, 863; Glick v City of New York, 53 AD2d 528). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D.2d 557, 688 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4095, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meyers-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack