When we last reported on Walters v. YMCA, the YMCA was unsuccessful in its effort to obtain summary judgment under New Jersey’s Charitable Immunity Act.  Unsatisfied with the result, the YMCA moved for reconsideration and presented additional information supporting its charitable programs and offerings, as well as a more detailed explanation of its financial resources and use of funding. Again, the trial court was unconvinced.

Most recently, the YMCA was granted interlocutory review by the Appellate Court. The Court thoroughly analyzed the Act, including the factors that an organization must satisfy in order for a non-profit organization to be protected from tort liability, and a historical evaluation of the YMCA’s development.  Ultimately the Appellate Court found that denial of summary judgment was premature.

In remanding the case back to the trial court, the Appellate Court noted that the fitness center where plaintiff was injured brings in $1 million in membership fees, but its operating expenses are twice that amount. The Court also highlighted the $734,000 in charitable contributions during the year of plaintiff’s accident. While the sum represents only approximately 10% of the YMCA’s total revenue, the Court held that the percentage does not on its own determine the YMCA’s charitable status and was not an insignificant amount.

The Court did not go so far as to deem the YMCA worthy of protection under the NJCIA. Rather, it remanded the case back to the trial court for a thorough evidentiary review and determination as to whether the YMCA’s charitable endeavors “dominate over other forms of enterprise.”  We will continue to monitor this interesting case.

Thanks to Emily Kidder for her contribution to this post and please write to Mike Bono for more information.