From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

DeRosa v. U.S. Dredging Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 22, 1995
215 A.D.2d 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

May 22, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Yachnin, J.).


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

The plaintiff, who had been drinking, dived or jumped from a wood piling located on the defendant's property into shallow water, rendering him a quadriplegic. The record indicates that this area was well known as a local diving destination and that the plaintiff was familiar with the water depth of the area.

We disagree with the Supreme Court's denial of the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The actions of the plaintiff, who was an experienced swimmer and diver and was familiar with the area, in diving headfirst into the shallow water was an unforeseeable superseding event absolving the defendant of liability (see, Boltax v Joy Day Camp, 67 N.Y.2d 617; Valdez v City of New York, 148 A.D.2d 697). Joy, J.P., Friedmann, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

DeRosa v. U.S. Dredging Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 22, 1995
215 A.D.2d 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

DeRosa v. U.S. Dredging Corporation

Case Details

Full title:DAVID DeROSA, Respondent, v. U.S. DREDGING CORPORATION, Appellant. (And a…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 22, 1995

Citations

215 A.D.2d 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
628 N.Y.S.2d 314

Citing Cases

Toyrola v. St. Denis

w York, 18 N.Y.3d 199, 936 N.Y.S.2d 645, 960 N.E.2d 414 [2011] [plaintiff should have known from conditions…

Tkeshelashvili v. State

Given claimant's familiarity with the lake and his admitted awareness of the fluctuating water level, he knew…