From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Yedid v. Gym. Center

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 24, 2006
33 A.D.3d 911 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Summary

finding experienced gymnast with six years of instruction assumed known risk of performing front flip on trampoline

Summary of this case from Duchesneau v. Cornell Univ.

Opinion

No. 2005-05792.

October 24, 2006.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Covello, J.), dated May 2, 2005, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Before: Prudenti, P.J., Mastro, Fisher and Lunn, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The infant plaintiff alleged that while he was performing a front flip on a trampoline in his gymnastics class, he was unable to complete his rotation and fell. The infant plaintiff had completed this maneuver unassisted on a number of occasions without incident. Indeed, right before the accident, he successfully completed this maneuver without any assistance.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendants submitted evidence sufficient to establish that the infant plaintiff assumed the apparent risk of falling when he voluntarily engaged in the subject maneuver ( see Koubek v Denis, 21 AD3d 453; Liccione v Gearing, 252 AD2d 956; cf. Hopkins v City of New York, 248 AD2d 441). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to submit evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Trummer v Niewisch, 17 AD3d 349; Honohan v Turrone, 297 AD2d 705).


Summaries of

Yedid v. Gym. Center

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 24, 2006
33 A.D.3d 911 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

finding experienced gymnast with six years of instruction assumed known risk of performing front flip on trampoline

Summary of this case from Duchesneau v. Cornell Univ.

affirming application of assumption of risk where plaintiff failed to provide evidence that he was unaware of risk of performing front flip on trampoline

Summary of this case from Duchesneau v. Cornell Univ.
Case details for

Yedid v. Gym. Center

Case Details

Full title:DAVID YEDID et al., Appellants, v. GYMNASTIC CENTER et al., Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 24, 2006

Citations

33 A.D.3d 911 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 7730
824 N.Y.S.2d 299

Citing Cases

Duchesneau v. Cornell Univ.

New York courts have barred the recovery of plaintiffs injured while jumping on a trampoline where the…

Kingston v. Cardinal O'Hara High Sch.

Thus, “it is indisputable that ... plaintiff assumed the risk of landing incorrectly when tumbling in the…