Court Opinion

ID: 9698297
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:46:44.715882+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:39.893566
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam
(on motion for rehearing). The specific questions concerning the status and conduct of defendants-appellants are questions of fact to be resolved after trial. At this stage, analyzing the complaint on demurrer, the complaint (insofar as it asserts a common-law action) alleges acts of common-law negligence on the part of all defendants-appellants, as coemployees, which *771aacts are alleged to have caused plaintiff’s injury. These acts are specifically set forth in paragraph 16, subs, (a), (b) and (c) of the complaint. These allegations state a sufficient cause of action against all the defendants-appellants. Insofar as the complaint alleges negligence for the failure to promulgate rules and regulations to prevent playing personnel from driving hard hockey pucks out of the rink, this alleges the breach of a legislative act for which the defendants-appellants cannot be held liable in this action. Therefore, insofar as paragraph 16(d) is concerned the complaint does not allege a valid cause of action.
Motion for rehearing denied without costs.