midpage

Putrino v. Buffalo Athletic ClubPutrino v. Buffalo Athletic Club

New York Court of Appeals
Oct 14, 1993
Versions:82 N.Y.2d 779
624 N.E.2d 676
604 N.Y.S.2d 539
1993 N.Y. LEXIS 5237

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. Plaintiff put forth no evidence that defendant’s aerobics classroom is a "place of public assembly” subject to statutory liability under Labor Law § 470. Moreover, even if the entire facility were shown to be a "place of public assembly”, the liability imposed is merely a codification of common law and the claim is no more viable than plaintiff’s other claims (Rickard v Farmers’ Museum, 284 App Div 140, 142). With respect to each of her common-law negligence causes of action, plaintiff failed to introduce admissible evidence establishing a triable issue of fact sufficient to preclude summary judgment. At best, plaintiff put forth the opinions of medical and health club experts which are conclusory and, therefore, inadequate to counter a summary judgment motion (Amatulli v Delhi Constr. Corp., 77 NY2d 525, 533-534, n 2). Accordingly, the Appellate Division correctly modified the order of Supreme Court by granting summary judgment dismissing all of plaintiff’s claims.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa, Smith and Levine concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Case Details

Case Name: Putrino v. Buffalo Athletic Club
Court Name: New York Court of Appeals
Date Published: Oct 14, 1993
Citations: 82 N.Y.2d 779; 624 N.E.2d 676; 604 N.Y.S.2d 539; 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 5237
Court Abbreviation: N.Y.
Log In