SEUNG YON CHOI VS. HUNTERDON COUNTY YMCA, INC.(L-0159-14, HUNTERDON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-5375-15T2
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Nov 1, 2017Background
- Five-year-old E.K. attended a YMCA summer golf camp whose brochure displayed the PGA logo and stated PGA professionals would provide instruction.
- While at camp, E.K. was struck in the mouth by another child’s golf club and suffered dental/face injuries.
- Plaintiffs (E.K.’s parents/guardian ad litem) sued multiple parties including the PGA, alleging negligent supervision and that the camp instructor (Nallen) was a PGA agent/employee or held out as such.
- Discovery showed Nallen was hired by the NJ Golf Foundation and paid via 1099-MISC as an independent contractor; no contract or documentary evidence tied the PGA to camp administration.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the PGA on the ground the PGA owed no duty to plaintiffs; the Appellate Division affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PGA can be liable vicariously via respondeat superior for Nallen’s negligence | Nallen acted as PGA agent/employee; PGA therefore liable for his negligence | Nallen was an independent contractor, not a PGA employee; no master–servant relationship | Court held no master–servant relationship; respondeat superior not established, summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether PGA is liable under apparent authority/agency because its logo/name appeared in YMCA brochure | Use of PGA logo/name in brochure created appearance PGA authorized or supervised camp and its instructors | No evidence PGA authorized or knew of logo use or held out Nallen as its agent; appearance must stem from principal’s conduct | Court held plaintiffs failed to show PGA created appearance of authority or that reliance was reasonable; apparent authority claim failed |
| Whether factual disputes precluded summary judgment | Plaintiffs argued discovery and facts warranted denial of summary judgment | PGA argued record showed no factual basis for agency or authorization | Court applied summary judgment standard de novo and found no genuine issue of material fact supporting PGA liability |
Key Cases Cited
- Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520 (standard for reviewing summary judgment)
- Templo Fuente De Vida Corp. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co., 224 N.J. 189 (appellate review of summary judgment is de novo)
- Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. v. Melcar Util. Co., 212 N.J. 576 (elements of negligence: duty, breach, causation, damages)
- Petrillo v. Bachenberg, 139 N.J. 472 (existence of duty is a question of law)
- Carter v. Reynolds, 175 N.J. 402 (respondeat superior requires master–servant relationship)
- Basil v. Wolf, 193 N.J. 38 (principals generally not liable for independent contractors)
- Mercer v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 324 N.J. Super. 290 (apparent authority requires principal-created appearance of agency and reasonable reliance)