AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

JOSE CANALES, ETC., ET AL., respondents, v. FINLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL, HUNTINGTON UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 3, defendant-respondent-appellant, HUNTINGTON COACH CORPORATION, ET AL., defendants-appellants-respondents, et al., defendants.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, on the law, the motion of the defendants Huntington Coach Corporation and Claude DeFay, and the motion of the defendant Finley Middle School, Huntington Union Free School District No. 3, are granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellants-respondents and the respondent-appellant, all cross claims insofar as asserted against the respondent-appellant are dismissed, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed; and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the appellants-respondents and the respondent-appellant.

Finley Middle School, Huntington Union Free School District No. 3 (hereinafter the school district), established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the sudden and unforeseen act which caused the infant plaintiff's injuries could not have been prevented by any reasonable degree of supervision. In response, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Velez v. Freeport Union Free School Dist., 292 A.D.2d 595; Nossoughi v. Ramapo Cent. School Dist., 287 A.D.2d 444; Janukajtis v. Fallon, 284 A.D.2d 428, 430; Convey v. City of Rye School Dist., 271 A.D.2d 154, 160). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the school district's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it ( see Francisquini v. New York City Bd. of Educ., 305 A.D.2d 455; Morman v. Ossining Union Free School Dist., 297 A.D.2d 788).

Moreover, the Supreme Court should have granted the motion of the bus company, the defendant Huntington Coach Corporation, and the bus driver, the defendant Claude DeFay, since in response to their demonstration of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiffs failed to submit sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether their alleged negligence was a proximate cause of the infant plaintiff's injuries ( see Derdiarian v. Felix Constr. Co., 51 N.Y.2d 308; Nocilla v. Middle Country Cent. School Dist., 302 A.D.2d 573; Thomas v. United States Soccer Fedn., 236 A.D.2d 600).

FLORIO, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CANALES v. FINLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL
(Jan 20, 2004)