Hyperlawhypertext legal database Putrino v. Buffalo Athletic Club 82 N.Y.2d 779

← Cases

Putrino v. Buffalo Athletic Club

82 N.Y.2d 779 Court N.Y. Decision date 1993-10-14 English

Contents

Majority

p. 779
[624 NE2d 676, 604 NYS2d 539]
Kathleen L. Putrino, as Administratrix of the Estate of Carmin R. Putrino, Deceased, Appellant, v Buffalo Athletic Club, Respondent.
Decided October 14, 1993
p. 780
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Weissfeld, Weissfeld & Weissfeld, Buffalo (Richard Weissfeld of counsel), for appellant.
p. 781
Lustig & Brown, Buffalo (John A. Ziegler of counsel), for respondent.

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.

Cases cited

Statutes and regulations cited