A New York appellate court has upheld a ruling that compels arbitration in a personal injury case involving a gym member and Matrix Sports Club, LLC. This decision affects how disputes between gym members and fitness facilities are resolved, emphasizing the importance of arbitration agreements in membership contracts.

The case, Cipri v. Matrix Sports Club, LLC, was decided by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York on May 13, 2026, under docket number 2024-08698. The ruling confirms the validity of an arbitration clause in a membership agreement, which requires disputes to be settled through arbitration rather than in court.

Background

The dispute began when Noemi Cipri, the plaintiff, entered into a membership agreement with Matrix Sports Club in March 2022. This agreement included an arbitration clause stating that any disputes related to the membership would be resolved through binding arbitration. The agreement also contained a liability waiver, where Cipri acknowledged the risks associated with using the gym's facilities.

In July 2023, Cipri filed a lawsuit against Matrix Sports Club and an instructor, Richard Barros, claiming she sustained injuries during an exercise class due to their negligence. Specifically, she alleged that she fell while using a box jump during the class. Following the lawsuit, the defendants sought to dismiss the case or compel arbitration based on the membership agreement.

The Ruling

The court ruled in favor of Matrix Sports Club, affirming the decision of the Supreme Court of Queens County that required Cipri to arbitrate her claims. The ruling stated, "The agreement to arbitrate 'expressly and unequivocally encompassed the subject matter of the plaintiff's claim.'" The judges involved in the decision included Lara J. Genovesi, Linda Christopher, Lillian Wan, and Donna-Marie E. Golia.

The court emphasized that the arbitration clause in the membership agreement was broad enough to cover Cipri's claims, which arose from her participation in activities at the gym. The judges noted that the clause was clear and unambiguous, stating that it included "any dispute, controversy, or claim arising out of or relating in any way to the Membership Agreement." Furthermore, they pointed out that interpreting the clause as limited to contract claims would contradict established principles of contract interpretation.

Impact

This ruling reinforces the enforceability of arbitration clauses in membership agreements, particularly in the context of personal injury claims arising from gym activities. It sets a precedent for how similar disputes may be handled in the future, indicating that courts will likely uphold arbitration agreements when they are clearly stated and agreed upon by both parties.

The decision also highlights the importance of understanding the terms of membership agreements before signing. Members of fitness facilities should be aware that agreeing to such contracts may limit their ability to pursue claims in court, as disputes may need to be resolved through arbitration instead.

What's Next

While the appellate court's decision is final in this case, Cipri could potentially seek further appeal to a higher court. However, details regarding any related cases or future appeals were not available in the court filing.