When a child gets injured playing sports whether recreationally or in school gym class, some parents seek to hold the opposing player, coach or teacher liable.  In Scavelli v Town of Carmel, the plaintiff was injured in gym class when he tripped after colliding with classmate Jordan Maher during a speedball game.  Both had been pursuing a ball in a jump ball start. Plaintiff sued Maher for negligence and recklessness, and sued the Mahopac Central School District for negligent supervision.

Initially at a hearing, the plaintiff testified that hand that the gym teacher had given instructions that the game was a “no contact” sport and had acted as a referee during the game.  Further, he indicated that he was unsure whether or not Maher tripped him purposely.  By contrast, at a later deposition, his testified that there were no instructions from the gym teacher to avoid bodily contact, that the gym teacher did not act as referee during the game, and that Maher intentionally tripped him because he was an aggressive player.  Maher testified that he was unaware an accident had happened until after the game was over, and the gym teacher testified that he saw an “accidental trip” during the game.

Although the motion court denied summary judgment motions by the defendants, the Second Department determined that the occurrence of an accident, in and of itself, was not enough to establish liability of either defendant.  Both the plaintiff and Maher admitted that they both ran toward the ball immediately after the start of the game.  Moreover, plaintiff’s deposition testimony that Maher intentionally tripped him was not only conclusory and speculative, but since an intentional state of mind is not an element of a negligence cause of action, such testimony did not raise an issue of fact as to Maher’s alleged negligence. Significantly, the plaintiff did not plead intentional tort as to Maher.  Given the facts, the court simply did not believe that running for a ball in a gym game could support a claim for negligence or recklessness.

As to the School District, the Court found that the evidence submitted demonstrated that the accident happened so quickly that the teacher could not have been prevented it with even the most intense supervision.  Further, despite plaintiff’s evidence that Maher previously shoved another student during gym class, the Court determined that this event was insufficiently specific to place the School District on notice of any conduct that caused plaintiff’s injuries.

Thanks to Sheree Fitzgerald for her contribution.

For more information contact Denise Fontana Ricci at .