A New York court recently ruled on a negligence case involving the Town of Hempstead, impacting how municipalities handle emergency medical care. The case, LaPenna v. Town of Hempstead (Docket No. 2024-13350), centers on a tragic incident where a 10-year-old boy, Lazar LaPenna, died during a baseball game. His father, Gregg LaPenna, filed a lawsuit claiming the town's negligence contributed to his son's death.

The ruling is significant as it addresses the responsibilities of local governments in providing emergency medical services and the legal requirements for filing claims against them. The outcome could influence how municipalities prepare for emergencies and maintain necessary medical equipment.

Background

The parties involved in the case are Gregg LaPenna, the plaintiff, and the Town of Hempstead, the defendant. The dispute arose after the tragic death of Lazar LaPenna, who collapsed during a baseball game. Gregg LaPenna alleged that the Town failed to properly maintain an automated external defibrillator (AED) and other medical equipment at the baseball field, which he claims could have saved his son's life.

After serving a notice of claim to the Town, LaPenna filed a lawsuit asserting common-law negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress. In February 2024, he amended his complaint to include allegations of negligence regarding the emergency medical care provided to his son, specifically citing the failure to use a Bag Valve Mask during the incident.

The Ruling

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York ruled on August 5, 2026, affirming the lower court's decision to dismiss part of LaPenna's complaint. The court found that the notice of claim did not adequately address the Town's alleged negligence in providing emergency medical care. The judges on the panel included Mark C. Dillon, Deborah A. Dowling, Carl J. Landicino, and James P. McCormack.

The court stated, "The proposed amendment was not technical in nature but included a substantive change to the facts and added a new theory of liability."

As a result, the court upheld the lower court's ruling, which granted the Town's motion to dismiss the claims related to negligent emergency medical care. The ruling emphasized that the notice of claim must be specific and timely in addressing the nature of the allegations against a municipality.

Impact

This ruling has important implications for how negligence claims against municipalities are handled in New York. It reinforces the requirement that claimants must provide a clear and specific notice of claim to allow municipalities to investigate and respond adequately to allegations of negligence.

The decision may deter future claims that lack sufficient detail in their notices of claim. It sets a precedent that municipalities can successfully challenge claims if the notice of claim does not adequately outline the specific allegations against them. This could lead to more stringent practices for filing claims against local governments, potentially affecting other cases involving emergency medical services.

What's Next

The plaintiff, Gregg LaPenna, has the option to appeal the ruling to a higher court, but details regarding any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. There are currently no related cases pending that have been mentioned in the opinion.