Opinion
February 13, 1996
Appeal from the Court of Claims (Albert Blinder, J.).
Like the Court of Claims, our review of the relevant former provisions of 19 N.Y.CRR parts 209-216 governing boxing matches leads us to conclude that there was no duty upon an inspector of the State Athletic Commission to inspect physically a boxing glove upon a boxer suiting up to ensure that it was free from concealed tampering. Our review of the facts also shows no basis for finding a special relationship ( see, Florence v Goldberg, 44 N.Y.2d 189, 195-196) between inspectors or any other State agents and a boxer which would have created such a duty. We have examined the claimants' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Wallach, J.P., Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.