December 2013 - Parks & Recreation - 26

L AW R E V I E W

ments for the services of instructors
who supervised the 'jousting' play
during which Grant was injured. "
Moreover, the City asserted that
WHID had subsequently " contracted with Wayfinder, which provided
its employee Rufus Griffin Johnston

the principal over the contractor's
performance. " Moreover, the court
acknowledged that " mere retention of
general supervisory powers over an independent contractor is insufficient to
impose vicarious liability on the principal. " In this particular instance, the

Having found the City owed no legal duty to
supervise or provide oversight to this particular
event in which the plaintiff was injured, the court
ordered plaintiff's claims to be dismissed.
and an apparent independent contractor Jacques Covell as the instructors for the subject 'jousting' event. "
As a general rule, the court noted
that " a principal is not vicariously liable for the independent contractor's
negligent acts or omissions, absent
appreciable amount of supervision,
oversight and control exercised by

Parks & Recreation

court found evidence that the City's
" involvement with, and participation
at, the Medieval Festival was limited. "
The City granted WHID a facility permit and had several onsite
meetings and walkthroughs with
WHID contacts in preparation for
the festival. The City also provided
pole taps, put up the banners on the

| D E C E M B E R 2 0 1 3 | W W W. N R PA . O R G

light poles, and arranged for the recycling services before and during
the event. Additionally, the City
set up the stage and the bleachers
for the musical entertainment. The
New York Police Department and
the Parks and Recreation enforcement patrol provided security.
More significantly, the court noted
that the City " did not take upon itself
any tasks involving the provision of
entertainment and vending services. "
None of the City's employees undertook participating in or supervising
the plays, games and other recreational activities. Nor did the City direct the
actions of Rufus Johnston or Jacques
Covell of Wayfinder before or during
the " jousting " game, at which Grant
was unfortunately injured.
Accordingly, the court concluded
that " the City did not exercise sufficient control over the recreational
activities at the Medieval Festival to
raise a triable issue of fact [i.e., unresolved questions warranting a trial]
as to whether it was vicariously liable
for the acts of the instructors provided by WHID and Wayfinder. "
Having found the City owed no legal duty to supervise or provide oversight to this particular event in which
Grant was injured, the court ordered
plaintiff 's claims to be dismissed and
summary judgment to be entered in
favor of the defendants the City of
New York and City of New York
Parks and Recreation.
Premises Exception
The above cases illustrate the general nonliability rule for independent
contractors providing services such as
security and supervision at events. In
contrast, as described below, an exception to the general rule exists, which
may impose landowner liability when
the injury arises out of an unsafe con-

December 2013 - Parks & Recreation

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of December 2013 - Parks & Recreation