TURCOTTE v. FELL

Cross appeals dismissed as abandoned.

Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from by plaintiffs.

Defendants Fell and Reynolds are awarded one bill of costs.

Defendant Fell owed a duty to his fellow jockey, plaintiff Ronald Turcotte, to refrain from reckless or intentionally harmful conduct, but because of the dangers inherent in the sport of thoroughbred horse racing, that duty did not extend to merely negligent conduct (see, Clapman v City of New York, 63 N.Y.2d 669; Davidoff v Metropolitan Baseball Club, 61 N.Y.2d 996; Akins v Glens Falls City School Dist., 53 N.Y.2d 325; Ross v Clouser, 637 S.W.2d 11 [Mo]; Nabozny v Barnhill, 31 Ill. App.3d 212, 334 N.E.2d 258; Ann., 13 ALR4th 623; Ann., 77 ALR3d 1300). Special Term correctly granted Fell's motion for summary judgment since the Turcottes' complaint did not allege, and there was no evidence before the court of, recklessness or intentional infliction of injury on the part of Fell. Reynolds was also properly granted summary judgment since any claim against him was strictly derivative in nature, based on the allegation that he was the employer of Fell. O'Connor, J.P., Weinstein, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur. [ 123 Misc.2d 877.]