From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reuveni v. Becec, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 2004
5 A.D.3d 367 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-05967.

Decided March 1, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dabiri, J.), dated May 14, 2003, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Jack Baum, P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellants.

Michael E. Pressman, New York, N.Y. (Siobhan M. Forde of counsel), for respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT and WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant demonstrated, prima facie, its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by showing that there was adequate playground supervision and, in any event, that the level of supervision was not the proximate cause of the incident ( see Cranston v. Nyack Pub. Schools, 303 A.D.2d 441; Navarra v. Lynbrook Pub. Schools Lynbrook Union Free School Dist., 289 A.D.2d 211; Ancewicz v. Western Suffolk BOCES, 282 A.D.2d 632). The burden then shifted to the plaintiffs to produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to show the existence of a triable issue of fact. The plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to inadequate supervision and whether the level of supervision was a proximate cause of the alleged accident ( see Mirand v. City of New York, 84 N.Y.2d 44; Ceglia v. Portledge School, 187 A.D.2d 550). Therefore, the motion for summary judgment was properly granted.

SANTUCCI, J.P., FLORIO, SCHMIDT and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Reuveni v. Becec, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 2004
5 A.D.3d 367 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Reuveni v. Becec, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:GAL DAVID REUVENI, ETC., ET AL., appellants, v. BECEC, INC., respondent

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

Date published: Mar 1, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 367 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
771 N.Y.S.2d 912

Citing Cases

Savastano v. Amusements

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs. The defendant Yorktown Central School District…

Springer v. Yonkers Bd. of Educ

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs. The appellant demonstrated, prima facie, its entitlement to…