Summer H. v. New York City Department of Education
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to plaintiff (see e.g. Branham v Loews Orpheum Cinemas, Inc., 8 NY3d 931, 932 [2007]), defendant demonstrated its entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The infant plaintiff’s classmate’s action in stepping backwards constituted a “thoughtless or careless act” not preventable by reasonable supervision (Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 49 [1994]).
Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mirand v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Branham v. Loews Orpheum Cinemas, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2007
3Cited by32 opinions
- People v. ClermontNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
- People v. LapiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. GrahamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- People v. SpencerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. AshlineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.