| Calcagno v John F. Kennedy Intermediate School |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 03466 [61 AD3d 911] |
| April 28, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Danielle Calcagno et al., Appellants, v John F. KennedyIntermediate School et al., Respondents. |
—[*1] Congdon, Flaherty, O'Callaghan, Reid, Donlon, Travis & Fishlinger, Uniondale, N.Y.(Gregory A. Cascino of counsel), for respondents.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an orderof the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), dated January 28, 2008, which granted thedefendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff Danielle Calcagno (hereinafter the infant plaintiff), a fourth-grade student at thedefendant John F. Kennedy Intermediate School in the defendant Deer Park School District,allegedly was injured while playing in the playground on a set of horizontal gymnastic barsduring her recess period. According to the infant plaintiff's deposition testimony, she wasattempting to spin forward around the lowest of three bars, which was about as high as her waist,when, in the middle of her spin, she intentionally let go of the bar in order to stop, and fell. Shewas on the bar during this movement for somewhere between 5 and 10 seconds.
The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgmentdismissing the complaint. "Schools are under a duty to adequately supervise the students in theircharge and they will be held liable for foreseeable injuries proximately related to the absence ofadequate supervision" (Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 49 [1994] [citationsomitted]). The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter oflaw by presenting evidence that there was adequate playground supervision (see Navarra vLynbrook Pub. Schools, Lynbrook Union Free School Dist., 289 AD2d 211 [2001]). Thedefendants presented evidence, including [*2]the infant plaintiff'sdeposition testimony, which established that there were at least three teachers in the recess areasupervising 10 classes of students, that there was a supervisor standing just outside theplayground area where the fall occurred, and that the infant plaintiff was engaged in normal playrather than a dangerous activity (see Berdecia v City of New York, 289 AD2d 354[2001]; Janukajtis v Fallon, 284 AD2d 428 [2001]). Moreover, the accident was sosudden that the defendants' level of supervision was not the proximate cause of the infantplaintiff's injuries (see Swan v Town ofBrookhaven, 32 AD3d 1012 [2006]; Mayer v Mahopac Cent. School Dist., 29 AD3d 653 [2006]). Inopposition, the plaintiffs failed to present evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Botti v Seaford Harbor ElementarySchool Dist. 6, 24 AD3d 486 [2005]; Navarra v Lynbrook Pub. Schools, LynbrookUnion Free School Dist., 289 AD2d at 211; see also Zuckerman v City of New York,49 NY2d 557 [1980]).
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit. Fisher, J.P., Angiolillo, Balkin andBelen, JJ., concur.