Berlin v. Nassau County Council, Boy Scouts of America, 229 A.D.2d 414, 645 N.Y.S.2d 90
Posted: October 25, 2010 Filed under: Legal Case, Minors, Youth, Children, New York, Summer Camp, Youth Camps | Tags: Adult Volunteer, Boy Scout, Boy Scouts of America, Brian Thomson, Florida, Nassau County New York, New York, New York City, Parental Responsibility; Youth Program, United States, Volunteer Leave a commentTo Read an Analysis of this decision see: Adult volunteer responsibility ends when the minor is delivered back to his parents.
Rita Berlin et al., Respondents,
vs.
Nassau County Council, Boy Scouts of America et al., Defendants, and Hugh Brickley, Appellant.
95-05684
Supreme Court Of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department
229 A.D.2d 414, 645 N.Y.S.2d 90, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. Decision
July 8, 1996, Decided
Devitt, Spellman, Barrett, Callahan, Leyden & Kenny, LLP., Smithtown, N.Y. (L. Kevin Sheridan of counsel), for appellant. Hershman & Leicher, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Harold M. Hershman of counsel), for respondents.
Pizzuto, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.
{*414} Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint and cross claims insofar as asserted against the appellant are dismissed, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.
Brian Thomson acquired a slingshot from a store in Florida while on a trip with his Boy Scout troop. The appellant Hugh Brickley and the defendants Kenneth Bistyga and Philip Lembo were the chaperones for the trip. Brickley immediately confiscated the slingshot and did not return it to Brian until after the trip when he left Brian with his parents in Delaware. Approximately one week later, after the Thomson family had returned to New York, the infant plaintiff Daniel Berlin was injured when he and Brian were playing with the slingshot in Daniel’s backyard.
Any duty on the part of Brickley to supervise or control the activities of Brian terminated when he returned the child to {*415} his parents‘ custody (see, Purdy v Public Adm’r of County of Westchester, 72 N.Y.2d 1, 8-9; see also, Pratt v Robinson, 39 N.Y.2d 554, 560; Griffith v City of New York, 123 A.D.2d 830, 832). Even assuming that Brickley was negligent in returning the slingshot to Brian, the alleged negligent supervision by Brian‘s parents, who were fully aware that he possessed and was using the slingshot, was a superseding intervening cause which attenuated any negligence on the part of Brickley from the ultimate injury to Daniel (see, Nolechek v Gesuale, 46 N.Y.2d 332, 338-339; Elardo v Town of Oyster Bay, 176 A.D.2d 912, 914). Consequently, Brickley’s motion for summary judgment should have been granted.
Pizzuto, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.
Colorado River Basin Science and Resource Management Symposium
Posted: July 8, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Adaptive management, Colorado, Colorado River, Glen Canyon Dam, United States, United States Bureau of Reclamation, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Geological Survey Leave a commentThis symposium will promote the exchange of information on research and management activities related to the restoration/conservation of the Colorado River and its major tributaries from the headwaters to the U.S./Mexico border. This 2-1/2 day symposium will feature plenary sessions as well as concurrent technical sessions, vendors and poster sessions.
Program Highlights
Image via Wikipedia
Multiple programs to restore and conserve the Colorado River’s native species and habitat have evolved independently since 1980 – programs that have had a major impact on water management and conservation efforts. These programs have many common goals and objectives, but there has been no formal opportunity for the exchange of information among these programs. This basin-wide symposium will provide scientists, stakeholders, land and resource managers, and decision-makers the opportunity to learn about these various programs and exchange ideas and data enhancing the effectiveness of these programs – and their success in restoring and conserving the river’s ecosystem.
Plenary and Technical Session Topics Include:
➤Status and trends of aquatic resources, including native and nonnative fishes
➤Climate change and long term drought: how will it affect restoration efforts?
➤Adaptive management and collaborative management decision making
➤Instream flow management and protection (including dam operations and reservoirs)
➤Nonnative fish management and restoration
➤Integrating recreational fisheries with native fish conservation
➤Monitoring program design and effectiveness
➤Native fish propagation, stocking genetic management
➤Sediment conservation and management
➤Societal values and Native American perspectives
➤Riparian habitat monitoring and restoration
More information on this symposium –
including a secure, on-line registration form –
is available at http://www.watereducation.org
U.S. Geological Survey – Southwest Biological Science Center
Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program
Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program
Bureau of Reclamation
National Park Service
Colorado River Fish and Wildlife Council
Water Education Foundation
San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program
Conference Sponsors:
Time and Place: All day Tuesday, November 18, all day Wednesday, November 19, and the morning of Thursday, November 20 at the Doubletree Resort Hotel, 5401 N. Scottsdale Road in Scottsdale.
Registration: $250; fee includes lunches and receptions on November 18 and 19.
Hotel Reservations: We have secured a limited number of rooms at the special rate of $102, plus tax, per night. You can call to reserve a room, 480-947-5400, or access the room block at http://doubletree.hilton.com/en/dt/groups/ personalized/PHXSJDT-WEF-20081114/ index.jhtml Be sure to mention the Water Education Foundation.
Vendors and Sponsors: Booth spaces are available for $1,000; sponsoring opportunities are available. Contact Jean Nordmann at Water Education Foundation for information, 916-444-6240 or jnordmann@watereducation.org
Abstracts: For information on abstract format, including a sample, and contact information for abstract submittal, visit the Water Education Foundation’s web site, www.watereducation.org
Conference Sponsors:
For more information, contact Water Education Foundation
Sometimes you only have to point things out
Posted: May 9, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: American Civil Liberties Union, Civil Liberties, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008, Law, Organizations, United States Leave a commentACLU Challenges Va. Law Banning Nude Summer Camps
Image via Wikipedia
Government Regulation of our Industry and how it Starts
Posted: February 11, 2008 Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: Government, Government agency, Regulation, United States Leave a commentAll of a sudden a government agency decides you need to be regulated.
The cause of government regulation is not statistical. Government regulation starts when the press is notified and picks up the cause, probably because of a slow news week or someone has a contact in the government. Very little statistical data is collected by any government agency. Hospitals collect data (for various medical and government groups) on catastrophic injuries. Catastrophic injuries are life changing injuries. Those are things like major facial injuries, concussions of a certain degree, major broken bones, etc.
An example is broken wrists which are not catastrophic or life changing. Snowboarding broken wrists have not surfaced yet as an issue to be followed. There are estimated to be about 1 broken wrist per 1000 skier days so that is 1 per 300 snowboarders. That is a fairly high number injuries for any sport, yet because broken wrists fall under the radar no one does much about it.
The other exception is studies either government or educational that collect data in some area. Those are usually limited by economics to a smaller geographic area or a limited number of hospitals. Many times there is a review of the information the government all ready collected.
How do things come to the attention of an agency in the government? In most cases angry family members or victims keep pushing either the press or a contact they have in government to “do something.” A lot of times this occurs because there is no other relief available, such as compensation or no one has dealt with the injury/fatality. Momentum is created and some agency is tasked with “doing something.”
Once an agency is tasked it is very difficult to stop or slow its momentum, especially if it must report to the press or a legislator. Two effective ways are time and the law. Some agencies can grind down to a stop if they are too unfamiliar and reach too much opposition to their investigation. However this is not guaranteed and very risky.
A better way is to show the agency does not have jurisdiction over the issue. By this you argue that the language that authorizes the agency does not allow the agency to move into this area. Another way is to argue the acts of the agency are illegal because it violates some other law.
Either way, if an injury or death meets public outcry, you need to get involved or face governmental review forever.
Recreation Law 