Gonzales v. Munchkinland Child Care, LLC
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
“As a general matter, ‘[s]chools are under a duty to adequately supervise the students in their charge and they will be held liable for foreseeable injuries proximately related to the absence of adequate supervision’ ” (Nash v Port Wash. Union Free School Dist., 83 AD3d 136, 146 [2011], quoting Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 49 [1994]; see Tanenbaum v Minnesauke Elementary School, 73 AD3d 743, 744 [2010]; Hansen v Bath & Tennis Mar. Corp., 73 AD3d 699, 700 [2010]; Armellino v Thomase, 72 AD3d 849, 849 [2010]). “ ‘The defendants, as providers of day care services, owed the plaintiff[s]…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Alvarez v. Prospect HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Mirand v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Orellano v. Samples Tire Equipment & Supply Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Brandy B. v. Eden Central School DistrictNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
- Sarva v. ChakravortyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cohen v. Finz & Finz, P.C.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Lopez v. D & D Day Care, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- A.D.G. v. Children's Ark Daycare Ctr., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
- Destiny S. v. John Quincy Adams Elementary SchoolAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Destiny S. v. John Quincy Adams Elementary SchoolAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.