Camp Counselor Lacks Necessary Duty in Camper's Negligence Claim
by
Joseph C. Maya on Apr. 21, 2017
Other Education Accident & Injury Personal Injury Criminal Juvenile Law
Summary: Blog post about a camp that was sued because of a child injured there and the reasons why the camp counselor did not have the legal duty that would have allowed the claim to proceed in court.
If you have a question or concern about special education law, school administration, federal standards, or the overall rights of a student, please feel free to call the expert education law attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport today at (203) 221-3100 .
In the case of Golderberger v. David Roberts Corp., a camp sought review of a decision by the Superior Court in New Haven County (Connecticut) in favor of an injured camper in his suit for breach of contract and negligence. In law, negligence is the failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another. In order to succeed in this claim, the camper must prove that (1) the camp and its counselors owed a duty of care to the camper, (2) the camp breached that duty and, (3) the breach of duty was a direct cause of the camper’s (4) real and compensable injury.
The injured camper attended the summer camp and was injured by a fellow camper. The injured camper contended that the camp had not provided a safe environment for him and that the camp and its counselors had been negligent. The trial court ruled in favor of the injured camper. The camp appealed. The court found that in the light most favorable to the injured camper, there was no basis for a ruling in favor of the injured camper. There was no negligence shown in that the camp had an appropriate number of counselors, none of whom were unqualified. The court vacated the prior ruling and remanded for a new trial.
The court vacated the ruling in favor of the injured party. “The jury could not reasonably have concluded that [the counselor] was negligent" said the court. "As appeared in the evidence, it was neither feasible nor advisable pedagogically for him as a counselor to be always in the presence of the boys whom he had in charge. The [camper] was injured during the rest hour, when the boys were expected to be quiet. [The counselor] had no reason to anticipate any disturbance. Since no duty rested upon him to be constantly with his charges, he cannot be held negligent under the circumstances."
If you have a child with a disability and have questions about special education law, please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 203-221-3100, or at JMaya@mayalaw.com, to schedule a free consultation.
Source: Goldberger v. David Roberts Corp., 139 Conn. 629, 96 A.2d 309, 1953 Conn. LEXIS 176 (Conn. 1953)
