ADILAH DONALDSON v. COMMUNITY FOOD BANK OF NEW JERSEY

(NOTE: The status of this decision is .)
 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1132-08T11132-08T1

ADILAH DONALDSON and MALIK

DONALDSON,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

COMMUNITY FOOD BANK OF NEW

JERSEY,

Defendant-Respondent.

_________________________________________________

 

Argued May 19, 2009 - Decided

Before Judges Skillman and Grall.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, Docket No.

L-7025-07.

Randall Bass argued the cause for appellants (Freeman & Bass, attorneys; Mr. Bass, on the brief).

Steven H. Daniels argued the cause for respondent (Schenck, Price, Smith & King, attorneys; Mr. Daniels, of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Plaintiff Adilah Donaldson was enrolled in a fourteen-week culinary arts training program conducted by the Service Training Academy of the Community Food Bank of New Jersey, a New Jersey non-profit entity organized for charitable and educational purposes. Plaintiff was not required to pay any fee to participate in this training program. On April 5, 2006, plaintiff slipped and fell in a puddle of water while participating in the program and suffered personal injuries.

Plaintiff brought this action against defendant seeking damages for the injuries she suffered in the slip and fall. The trial court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint on the ground that it is barred by the Charitable Immunity Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-7 to -11.

On appeal, plaintiff presents the following arguments:

I. THE PLAINTIFF WAS PERFORMING A SERVICE

FOR THE DEFENDANT AT THE TIME OF HER

ACCIDENT.

II. STRICT SCRUTINY SHOULD BE APPLIED TO

THE DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR APPLICATION

OF THE CHARITABLE IMMUNITY ACT IN THIS

MATTER.

III. THERE ARE FACTUAL DISPUTES IN THE

MOTION RECORD WHICH REQUIRE

CREDIBILITY DETERMINATIONS BY THE

TRIER OF FACT.

We reject these arguments and affirm the summary judgment in defendant's favor substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Casale's September 26, 2008 oral opinion. We add the following supplemental comments.

Plaintiff's primary argument is that the Charitable Immunity Act does not bar her claim because she was conferring a benefit upon defendant at the time of her accident. Plaintiff points to the fact that some of the food she and other students prepared in their culinary arts training program was eaten by defendant's employees. Plaintiff analogizes this benefit to defendant from the food she participated in preparing to the benefit conferred upon a charity by a volunteer who performs services for the charity. However, the bar to suit established by the Charitable Immunity Act applies if a person "is a beneficiary, to whatever degree, of the works of such nonprofit [organization]." N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-7 (emphasis added). Therefore, this immunity applies even if a charitable beneficiary's activities also confer an incidental benefit upon the charity. The tangible benefit that plaintiff received from the culinary arts training program was totally different from the "intangible personal satisfaction" a volunteer receives from performing services for a charitable organization. See DeVries v. Habitat for Humanity, 290 N.J. Super. 479, 483-93 (App. Div. 1996), aff'd o.b., 147 N.J. 619 (1997).

Finally, we note that defendant's entitlement to immunity under the Charitable Immunity Act is not defeated by the fact that defendant receives food from the United States Department of Agriculture and some funds from the State of New Jersey because it is undisputed that defendant receives substantial charitable contributions. See O'Connell v. State, 171 N.J. 484, 490-500 (2002); Morales v. N.J. Academy of Aquatic Sciences, 302 N.J. Super. 50, 54-56 (App. Div. 1997).

Affirmed.

 

(continued)

(continued)

4

A-1132-08T1

June 4, 2009