A New York court has dismissed a lawsuit filed by Maria Carrero-Santiago against Asphalt Green, Inc. The case arose after Carrero-Santiago was injured by a basketball while supervising children during recess at Public School 306. The court's decision is significant as it clarifies the legal responsibilities of organizations involved in school programs.

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York ruled on August 27, 2026, reversing a previous decision that denied Asphalt Green's motion for summary judgment. This ruling means that Carrero-Santiago's complaint has been dismissed, which could set a precedent for similar cases involving injuries during school activities.

Background

The parties involved in this case are Maria Carrero-Santiago, the plaintiff, and Asphalt Green, Inc., along with its employee, Terrance A. Brown, the defendants. Carrero-Santiago worked as a school aide for the New York City Department of Education from 1999 until 2018. Her injury occurred while she was supervising children on a playground at PS 306, where she was reportedly standing 10 to 12 feet away from a basketball court.

Asphalt Green had a contract with PS 306 to provide a recess enhancement program, which included hiring Brown as a basketball coach. The program aimed to create a safe and active recess environment for students. Carrero-Santiago alleged that she was hit in the back by a basketball that ricocheted off the rim of the basketball hoop. This incident led her to file a lawsuit against Asphalt Green and Brown, claiming negligence.

The Ruling

The court ruled in favor of Asphalt Green, stating that the defendants did not owe a duty of care to Carrero-Santiago. The judge noted that Carrero-Santiago was not a party to the contract between Asphalt Green and PS 306, which typically means she cannot claim damages based on that contract. The court stated, "a defendant's contractual obligation, standing alone, will generally not give rise to tort liability in favor of a third party."

The ruling emphasized that none of the exceptions to this general rule applied in Carrero-Santiago's case. The court found that there was no evidence that Brown or Asphalt Green had launched an instrument of harm or failed to exercise reasonable care. The judge pointed out that a missed basketball shot is a common occurrence in games and that Brown could not be expected to warn every time a ball hit the rim.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for similar cases in the future. It clarifies that organizations providing services in schools may not be held liable for injuries sustained by third parties unless specific conditions are met. The court's decision reinforces the idea that individuals who are aware of the risks associated with recreational activities, such as basketball, may be deemed to have assumed those risks.

The ruling may also affect how schools and organizations approach liability and safety measures during recess. As schools continue to partner with outside organizations for programs, this decision highlights the importance of understanding the legal responsibilities and potential liabilities involved in such agreements.

What's Next

Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether Carrero-Santiago plans to appeal the decision. There are no related cases pending that were mentioned in the ruling.