Perez v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Perez v. Board of Education

291 A.D.2d 269, 737 N.Y.S.2d 599, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1598

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

DecidedFebruary 14, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 291 A.D.2d 269 (Perez 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

Perez v. Board of Education, 291 A.D.2d 269, 737 N.Y.S.2d 599, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order,. Supreme Court, Bronx [270]*270County (Stanley Green, J.), entered September 27, 2001, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendant-respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The infant plaintiff, a second grader, was standing near the cubbies in his classroom where students stored their personal belongings and supplies when he was accidentally poked in the eye with a sharpened pencil by another student as she attempted to detach a removable eraser from the pencil. The action was properly dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to rebut defendant school board’s prima facie showing that no accidents like this had ever happened before (see, Ohman v Board of Educ., 300 NY 306, 310). To hold defendant responsible for this accident would be to require it to continuously supervise virtually all of the movements and activities of its students, making it, in effect, an insurer of its students’ safety (id. at 309; see, Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 49; cf., e.g., Malik v Greater Johnstown Enlarged School Dist., 248 AD2d 774; Ascher v Scarsdale School Dist., 267 AD2d 339). Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Andrias, Rubin and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order,. Supreme Court, Bronx [270]*270County (Stanley Green, J.), entered September 27, 2001, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendant-respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The infant plaintiff, a second grader, was standing near the cubbies in his classroom where students stored their personal belongings and supplies when he was accidentally poked in the eye with a sharpened pencil by another student as she attempted to detach a removable eraser from the pencil. The action was properly dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to rebut defendant school board’s prima facie showing that no accidents like this had ever happened before (see, Ohman v Board of Educ., 300 NY 306, 310). To hold defendant responsible for this accident would be to require it to continuously supervise virtually all of the movements and activities of its students, making it, in effect, an insurer of its students’ safety (id. at 309; see, Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 49; cf., e.g., Malik v Greater Johnstown Enlarged School Dist., 248 AD2d 774; Ascher v Scarsdale School Dist., 267 AD2d 339). Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Andrias, Rubin and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 A.D.2d 269, 737 N.Y.S.2d 599, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perez-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack