BMS Partner Sheryl Sanford Obtains Dismissal of Negligence Claims Asserted Against Camp

In Chau v. Camp K-20, Inc, Kings County Index No. 512855/2019, plaintiff claimed personal injuries resulting from a bicycle accident on a road running through a state park abutting the campgrounds leased during the summer by our client, a non-profit family camping group. Plaintiff refused to voluntarily dismiss the claims even though our client had no statutory, common law, or contractual duty relating to the maintenance and repair of the road or pothole. As the case involved a state park, plaintiff maintained a parallel action against the State of New York in the Court of Claims. As plaintiff would not drop the claims, Sheryl Sanford completed discovery and moved for summary judgment arguing that plaintiff’s negligence claims should be dismissed because Camp K-20 did not owe plaintiff any duty as it did not own the subject road, had no obligation or practice of repairing the road, and did not create the subject pothole. Plaintiff opposed the motion arguing that there was a triable issue of fact in that bikers and hikers used the road and their presence was thus foreseeable to our client which should have warned plaintiff of the road condition. In reply, Ms. Sanford successfully argued that foreseeability of hikers or bikers that ignored the signs was irrelevant as our client had no duty to plaintiff who was not a camper, had no obligation to maintain the road, and did not create the pothole. The Court agreed, finding that foreseeability alone did not create a duty on the part of the camp to plaintiff and that Camp K-20 did not create the pothole, thereby dismissing all claims and granting an award for costs. Our client, a family camping group that has leased the campgrounds for approximately 100 summers, was overjoyed to have the baseless claim lifted in time for summer camp.