## Facts

- Sixto R. Benitez, a 19-year-old high school senior and football player, voluntarily played interscholastic football at George Washington High School (GW).
- The Public Schools Athletic League (PSAL) reassigned GW from Division B to Division A under league guidelines after GW’s sustained success; GW’s requests to return to Division B based on safety concerns were denied.
- PSAL determined GW’s Division A injury record was comparable in number and degree to other Division A teams and did not warrant reassignment.
- GW played John F. Kennedy High School (JFK), a larger Division A team; GW’s coach sought permission to forfeit or withdraw due to mismatch concerns, but the principal refused.
- Benitez played both offense and defense for the entire first half, felt fatigued, but did not ask to be substituted or tell the coach; the coach did not require him to remain on the field.
- Near the end of the first half, while executing a block, Benitez suffered a broken neck and a paralyzing spinal injury.
- Benitez sued the New York City Board of Education and PSAL, alleging negligent divisional placement/retention, negligent permitting of the JFK game, and failure to provide adequate rest, among other theories.
- A jury found for Benitez and awarded damages (reduced for comparative negligence); the Appellate Division affirmed, and the New York Court of Appeals granted review.

## Issues

1. What duty and standard of care do a board of education and an interscholastic athletic league owe to student athletes participating voluntarily in contact sports?
2. Whether defendants breached that duty by assigning/retaining GW in Division A, allowing the JFK game to proceed, or failing to prevent Benitez from playing while fatigued.
3. Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury on a heightened “prudent parent” standard instead of ordinary reasonable care.
4. Whether any alleged breach was a proximate cause of Benitez’s injury, given the inherent risks of football and Benitez’s voluntary participation.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division and dismissed the complaint.
- The court held the proper standard is ordinary reasonable care, not a heightened “prudent parent” standard.
- The court held Benitez failed to prove defendants breached a duty of reasonable care that proximately caused his injury.
- The court concluded the evidence showed no concealed or unreasonably increased risk beyond the inherent dangers of interscholastic football.

## Legal Principles

- Schools, their employees, and interscholastic athletic organizations owe student athletes a duty of ordinary reasonable care, not a heightened parental duty.
- They are not insurers of athlete safety; liability requires proof of unreasonable conduct creating risks that are unassumed, concealed, or unreasonably increased.
- Voluntary participants in contact sports assume risks inherent in the sport, including fatigue and the possibility of serious injury, absent proof that defendants concealed or unreasonably magnified those risks.
- Administrative decisions about divisional placement and scheduling do not establish negligence without proof that they created a qualitatively different, non-inherent danger and proximately caused the injury.

## Conclusion

New York’s highest court held that a school board and athletic league are liable to an injured student athlete only for failure to use ordinary reasonable care to protect against concealed or unreasonably increased risks; because the injury arose from ordinary play in a contact sport and plaintiff failed to show breach and proximate cause, the complaint was dismissed.


Benitez v. New York City Bd. of Educ., 73 N.Y.2d 650, 543 N.Y.S.2d 29 (N.Y. 1989)