H.B. v. Town of Oyster Bay

H.B., 2025 NY Slip Op 01203 (Appellate Division Second Department 2025) · Appellate Division, Second Department · March 5, 2025 · No. Index No. 607178/20

Summary

This Appellate Division decision reviews a lower court's grant of summary judgment in a personal injury action stemming from a youth ice hockey clinic accident. The court affirmed summary judgment in favor of an independent contractor operator, finding no basis for third-party tort liability under New York law. However, it reversed the summary judgment granted to the town and its employee-coach, holding that genuine issues of fact existed regarding whether an infant plaintiff could have appreciated the inherent risks of the sport to invoke the assumption of risk defense.

Court
Appellate Division, Second Department
Writing for the Court
BETSY BARROS, J.P.; WILLIAM G. FORD; LAURENCE L. LOVE; PHILLIP HOM, JJ.
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
March 5, 2025
Docket number
Index No. 607178/20
Procedural posture
Appeal from order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
H.B., etc., et al. v. Town of Oyster Bay, et al.
Disposition
other

Topics

personal injuryassumption of risksummary judgmenttortscivil procedure

Practice areas

tortscivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether HPP Rinx, Inc. is liable for the infant’s injuries and whether summary judgment was proper as a matter of law.
  2. Whether the Town of Oyster Bay and Robert Marlow are entitled to summary judgment based on the doctrine of assumption of risk.

Holdings

  1. Summary judgment dismissing the complaint against HPP Rinx, Inc. was proper because the plaintiffs were not parties to the contract between HPP and the Town and failed to raise a triable issue of fact that HPP launched a force or instrument of harm.
  2. The Town defendants were not entitled to summary judgment because there were genuine issues of fact as to whether the infant plaintiff appreciated and assumed the risks of the hockey clinic.

Key quotations

The doctrine applies where a consenting participant in sporting and amusement activities 'is aware of the risks; has an appreciation of the nature of the risks; and voluntarily assumes the risks.' (at 356)

Factual background

In May 2019, a four‑year‑old infant plaintiff was injured at a youth ice‑hockey clinic when coach Robert Marlow fell on the infant while skating backwards. The infant’s mother sued HPP Rinx, Inc., the Town of Oyster Bay, and Marlow for personal injuries. HPP operated the ice‑rink under a concession contract with the Town; Marlow was employed by the Town.

Procedural history

The Supreme Court, Nassau County entered an order on October 4, 2023 granting summary judgment dismissing the complaint against HPP Rinx, Inc. and also dismissing the complaint against the Town of Oyster Bay and Robert Marlow. The plaintiffs appealed the order.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…