AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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
Judges

JOSEPH HARTING, Appellant, v. COMMUNITY REFORMED CHURCH OF COLONIE, Respondent.

Mercure, J.

Plaintiff, a player on a softball team sponsored by defendant in a church league, suffered the injuries forming the basis for this action when a weighted warm-up "doughnut" slipped off a teammate's bat and struck plaintiff on the head. Supreme Court granted summary judgment in favor of defendant on the ground that the uncontroverted proof established defendant's freedom from negligence in that it did not supervise or control the softball team and did not supply, purchase, store or make available the equipment involved in the accident, the "doughnut". Plaintiff appeals.

We reverse. Defendant's pastor, Bruce Cornwell, testified that the softball team was a sponsored program falling under defendant's lay ministries committee and that defendant made funds available to the team for the purchase of necessary equipment and published game results in the church bulletin. Philip Walrath testified that, as team manager, he was put in charge of selecting and purchasing equipment, either with funds supplied by defendant or collected from team members, and that defendant sometimes paid the team's annual fee for participating in the church league. Notably, defendant satisfied an insurance requirement of the municipal owner of the team's "home" park by furnishing a certificate showing that it had in effect a policy of liability insurance covering the team. In our view, the foregoing evidence raises a legitimate factual issue as to whether Walrath had actual or apparent authority to act on defendant's behalf (see, Garcia v Herald Tribune Fresh Air Fund, 51 A.D.2d 897; see also, Fogel v Hertz Intl., 141 A.D.2d 375; Edwards v North Am. Van Lines, 129 A.D.2d 869).

As a final matter, we also agree with plaintiff that a factual question exists as to whether plaintiff assumed the risk that a worn batting "doughnut" would fly off the bat of an on-deck batter and strike him. Generally, a sports participant does not assume the risk of faulty equipment unless he or she knows of the defective condition and uses the equipment anyway (see, 6B Warren, Negligence in the New York Courts, Sports Participants, § 4, at 822 [3d ed]).

Weiss, P.J., Mikoll and Mahoney, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and motion denied.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HARTING v. COMMUNITY REFORMED CH. OF COLONIE
(Nov 10, 1993)