Ordered that the appeal from the order dated December 17, 1997, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated July 7, 1998, made upon reargument; and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated July 7, 1998, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs.
The Supreme Court correctly determined that the injured plaintiff, an experienced rider who was aware of the subject horse's background, assumed the risks inherent in the sport of horseback riding, including the risk that a horse might bolt or become frightened ( see, Morgan v. State of New York, 90 N.Y.2d 471, 484; Turcotte v. Fell, 68 N.Y.2d 432, 439; Harrington v. Colvin, 237 A.D.2d 992; cf., Lewis v. Erie County Agric. Socy., 256 A.D.2d 1114; Hommel v. Benshoff, 178 Misc.2d 1038). Accordingly, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.