The best-known lawsuit involving Shibley Day Camp is Seegers v. Shibley Summer Day Camp, Inc., a 1998 New York appellate decision that ended in the camp’s favor after junior staff members were accused of tying, gagging, and locking a child in a shed. Two other suits are on record as well: a 2010 action by trust beneficiaries against the camp’s trustees, and a 2017 tort case filed by a parent in Queens County. Only Seegers produced a published legal ruling.
What Happened in the Seegers Case
Eva Seegers sued Shibley Summer Day Camp, Inc. on behalf of herself and her son Bryan, who was a camper at the time. The complaint alleged that junior staff members tied, gagged, and locked Bryan in a shed.1CaseMine. Seegers v. Shibley Summer Day Camp, Inc.
The family pressed three theories against the camp itself. First, that the camp was vicariously liable for what its employees did. Second, that a counselor’s failure to accompany Bryan to the shed was a proximate cause of his injuries. Third, that the camp had been negligent in how it hired, supervised, and trained its staff.
Why the Camp Won
On November 23, 1998, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the lower court’s ruling for the camp and rejected every theory the family raised.2Leagle. Seegers v. Shibley Summer Day Camp, Inc., 255 A.D.2d 499
Vicarious Liability
Under New York law, an employer is not vicariously liable when an employee acts outside the scope of employment and not in furtherance of the employer’s business. The court found that the junior staffers’ conduct was “personally motivated, not within the scope of employment, and not in furtherance of camp business.”1CaseMine. Seegers v. Shibley Summer Day Camp, Inc. The court’s reasoning drew on Riviello v. Waldron, the 1979 Court of Appeals decision that governs how New York courts decide whether an employee’s act falls within the scope of employment.3vLex. Riviello v. Waldron, 47 N.Y.2d 297 Tying and gagging a child bore no relationship to camp duties.
Proximate Cause
The court also rejected the argument that the counselor’s failure to accompany Bryan caused what happened. The counselor’s absence, the panel held, was not the proximate cause of the boy’s injuries.1CaseMine. Seegers v. Shibley Summer Day Camp, Inc.
Negligent Hiring and Supervision
The negligent hiring and supervision claims failed for a different reason. Citing Kenneth R. v. Roman Catholic Diocese, the court held that an employer cannot be liable on these theories without some prior knowledge that the employee had dangerous propensities. The camp had no such notice about the staff members involved.1CaseMine. Seegers v. Shibley Summer Day Camp, Inc.
How New York Treats Camp Liability
Camps in New York operate under the doctrine of in loco parentis, meaning they stand in a parent’s role while a child is in their care. That does not make a camp an insurer of a child’s safety. A camp is liable only for foreseeable injuries that result from inadequate supervision.4Jonathan Cooper Law. How Camp and School Liability Differ Under New York Law Seegers illustrates the outer edge of that rule: when what staff members do is personal, unrelated to their duties, and unforeseeable to management, the camp is not on the hook.
The 2010 Norris Trustee Lawsuit
In 2010, members of the Norris family sued Harvey Kulchin and other trustees in Nassau County Supreme Court. The Norrises were beneficiaries of trusts that held 100% ownership of Shibley Day Camp, Inc. and Shibley Management Corp. They alleged that the trustees had failed to maximize the value of the camp’s 19.2-acre Roslyn property, which they argued would be worth more as residential development, and that Kulchin had diverted more than $1,000,000 in camp funds to himself.5New York State Unified Court System. Norris v. Kulchin, Index No. 022499/2010
In July 2011, the court allowed the breach of fiduciary duty and accounting claims to proceed and ordered production of corporate and bank records. It dismissed the conversion and unjust enrichment claims, pointing out that the Kulchins’ employment contracts had been approved by the trustees and that the plaintiffs had not itemized specific acts of misconduct. The court also refused to freeze camp operations, finding that any losses were economic and could be handled through money damages.5New York State Unified Court System. Norris v. Kulchin, Index No. 022499/2010
The 2017 Estrada Tort Action
In 2017, Jessica Estrada filed a tort action in Queens County Supreme Court on behalf of herself and her infant child, A.R., against Shibley Day Camp and several related entities: Campgroup, LLC, Shibley Day Camp, Inc., Attara, Inc., Shibley Management Corp., Shibley Operating Co., LLC, and Shibley Real Estate Co., LLC. The case was categorized as “tort-other” and was eventually disposed of. The specific allegations and resolution are not detailed in available court records.6Trellis Law. Estrada, Jessica v. Shibley Day Camp, Order to Show Cause Campgroup, LLC appears as a co-defendant because Shibley became part of the CampGroup family of camps in 2015.7Shibley Day Camp. History