top of page

News

Defendants Strike Out On Appeal For Summary Judgment On Alleged Baseball Field Negligence (NY)

June 18, 2020

Share to:

<p style="text-align: justify;">In <em><a href="https://www.wcmlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Morace-v.-Commack-North-Baseball-Clubs-Inc.pdf">Morace v. Commack North Baseball Clubs Inc</a>., </em>the infant plaintiff was at baseball practice when his coach hit a ball to him.  As the infant plaintiff raced to catch the ball, he allegedly fell and sustained injuries after encountering a hole at the location of a sprinkler head. A lawsuit was filed against the Town of Smithtown and Commack Baseball. Both defendants moved for summary judgment; however, the lower court denied the motions. These appeals ensued.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The Appellate Division, Second Department upheld the lower court decision as they held both defendants failed to establish their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the ground that the plaintiffs were unable to identify the cause of the infant plaintiff's accident nor as a matter of law on the ground that the infant plaintiff assumed the risk of his injuries.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The Town, which owned the ballpark, did not establish its prima facie entitlement that it lacked notice of the condition alleged. Moreover, Commack Baseball failed to demonstrate that Commack Baseball provided adequate supervision of the infant plaintiff on the date of the subject accident or that a lack of adequate supervision was not a proximate cause of the infant plaintiff's injuries.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Thanks to Paul Vitale for his contribution to this post.  Please email <a href="mailto:gcoats@wcmlaw.com">Georgia Coats</a> with any questions.</p>

Headshot of Staff Member
Button
Button
Button
Button

Contact

bottom of page