Schwab v. Gadsden

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schwab v. Gadsden

286 A.D.2d 431, 729 N.Y.S.2d 502, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8125

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

DecidedAugust 20, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 286 A.D.2d 431 (Schwab v. Gadsden) 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

Schwab v. Gadsden, 286 A.D.2d 431, 729 N.Y.S.2d 502, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8125 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCaffrey, J.), dated March 30, 2000, which granted the motion of the. defendants Charles Massey, Miller Tabak Hirsch & Co., MTH Holdings, Inc., MTH Co., Jeffrey David Miller, Jeffrey Steven Tabak, and Gary Dean Hirsch for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, and the separate motion of the defendants Mitch Winkeleer and Kay Winkeleer for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The plaintiff allegedly was assaulted during a basketball game by two members of the opposing team, the defendants Theodore Gadsden and Andrew Richards. Contrary to the plaintiffs contentions, the Supreme Court correctly determined that he failed to prove that the organizers of the league, or the sponsors of the team for which Gadsden and Richards played, should have foreseen the assault. Accordingly, they cannot be held liable for the spontaneous criminal acts of Gadsden and Richards (see, Tannenbaum v Town of Hempstead, 255 AD2d 309; Thomas v United States Soccer Fedn., 236 AD2d 600).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J. P., H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, 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 plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCaffrey, J.), dated March 30, 2000, which granted the motion of the. defendants Charles Massey, Miller Tabak Hirsch & Co., MTH Holdings, Inc., MTH Co., Jeffrey David Miller, Jeffrey Steven Tabak, and Gary Dean Hirsch for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, and the separate motion of the defendants Mitch Winkeleer and Kay Winkeleer for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The plaintiff allegedly was assaulted during a basketball game by two members of the opposing team, the defendants Theodore Gadsden and Andrew Richards. Contrary to the plaintiffs contentions, the Supreme Court correctly determined that he failed to prove that the organizers of the league, or the sponsors of the team for which Gadsden and Richards played, should have foreseen the assault. Accordingly, they cannot be held liable for the spontaneous criminal acts of Gadsden and Richards (see, Tannenbaum v Town of Hempstead, 255 AD2d 309; Thomas v United States Soccer Fedn., 236 AD2d 600).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J. P., H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 A.D.2d 431, 729 N.Y.S.2d 502, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwab-v-gadsden-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack