Plaintiff was injured while at a municipal swimming pool during a water therapy session run by a privant company who reserved use of the pool for a nominal fee. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgement claiming municipal immunity. Plaintiff argued that his claim was nat barred because it fell under the proprietary function exception and becuase he constituted an identifiable person under the identifiable person, imminenet harm exception. The court found in favor of the defendant.
Related Posts:
