Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gayle Levy, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Town Sports International

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts Appellate Division, First Department


December 13, 2012

GAYLE LEVY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
TOWN SPORTS INTERNATIONAL, INC. DOING BUSINESS AS NEW YORK SPORTS CLUB, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Levy v Town Sports Intl., Inc.

Decided on December 13, 2012

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Renwick, Clark, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saliann Scarpulla, J.), entered August 11, 2011, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

Plaintiff was injured when, while engaged in fitness training at defendant gym, she fell after being directed by her personal trainer (defendant's employee) to perform jump repetitions on an exercise ball. Plaintiff's opposition to defendant's showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law based on an assumption of the risk defense, raised triable issues of fact that warrant the denial of the motion. Such issues include whether the trainer, knowing that plaintiff had osteoporosis and had recently had surgery, unreasonably increased the risk of harm to plaintiff by recommending that she perform an advanced exercise with multiple repetitions (see Mathis v New York Health Club, 261 AD2d 345 [1st Dept 1999]; see also Corrigan v Musclemakers, Inc., 258 AD2d 861, 863 [3d Dept 1999]); whether the trainer was in a proper position to help guard against plaintiff falling during the exercise; and whether plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risks or was following the trainer's expert advice and encouragement while attempting to complete the exercise (see Mathis at 346).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: DECEMBER 13, 2012

CLERK

20121213

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.