Summary
reversing denial of summary judgment for defendants, finding that plaintiff who slipped on wet area of basketball court "concededly knew the wet area was there and knew it to be slippery" and therefore "assumed the obvious risk of injury inherent in playing basketball on a court he knew to be slippery"
Summary of this case from Cox v. McKernanOpinion
May 26, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.)
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the appellants motion for summary judgment is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against them; and the action against the "remaining defendant is severed.
"As a general rule [sports] participants properly may be held to have consented, by their participation, to those injury causing events which are known, apparent, or reasonably foreseeable consequences of the participation" ( Turcotte v. Fell 68 N.Y.2d 432, 439; see, Pascucci v. Town of Oyster Bay, 186 A.D.2d 725). "The risks assumed by a voluntary participant include those associated with the playing field, and any open and obvious conditions on it" ( Reynolds v. Jefferson Val. Racquet Club, 238 A.D.2d 493, 494; see, Walner v. City of New York, 243 A.D.2d 629; Touti v. City of New York, 233 A.D.2d 496).
The plaintiff allegedly suffered injuries when he slipped and fell in a wet area of the appellants basketball court. The plaintiff concededly knew the wet area was there and knew it to be slippery. "Under these circumstances, we find that the plaintiff assumed the obvious risk of injury inherent in playing basketball on a court he knew to be slippery and is therefore precluded from recovery" ( Capello v. Village of Suffern, 232 A.D.2d 599, 600; see, Steward v. Town of Clarkstown, 224 A.D.2d 405).
O'Brien, J.P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.