August 10, 201015 yr isnt there something printed on the back of your ticket removing any/all liability from the teams for items that land in the stands. (bats, balls, players, etc)
August 10, 201015 yr lol why is he sueing Rawlings and Castro again? Did they make the bat "too hard"? Edited August 10, 201015 yr by chw42
August 10, 201015 yr QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Aug 9, 2010 -> 07:35 PM) isnt there something printed on the back of your ticket removing any/all liability from the teams for items that land in the stands. (bats, balls, players, etc) Yup. Last sentence in the article: "MLB says on tickets that fans assume risk for accidents incidental to the game, such as getting hit by foul balls and broken bats."
August 10, 201015 yr Here's an article with a picture of his busted face (kind of graphic)... Not saying he didn't assume the risk that we all take on when we go to a game, but he looks like he got hit pretty hard. NY POST
August 10, 201015 yr You cant win that suit, thats why they print that warning on the tickets. Good luck buddy.
August 10, 201015 yr QUOTE (RockRaines @ Aug 10, 2010 -> 03:04 PM) You cant win that suit, thats why they print that warning on the tickets. Good luck buddy. Think the prick wants a quick cash settlement, hope MLB and the Mets stick to their guns and fight this in court.
August 10, 201015 yr Here's a pretty good article explaining why the ticket disclaimer may not make this case such a slam dunk: http://notanotherbaseballblog.wordpress.co...ple-bat-injury/
August 10, 201015 yr QUOTE (RockRaines @ Aug 10, 2010 -> 09:04 AM) You cant win that suit, thats why they print that warning on the tickets. Good luck buddy. Liability waivers don't get you out of all lawsuits. I know race tracks that have lost lawsuits even with a bunch of signed waivers because they were found to have been negligent in maintenance. IANAL, but if you could show that MLB knew these bats posed a significant threat to fans and weren't necessarily a fact of the game (like a foul ball is), you might have a case. edit: what that blog says. Not sure why there's a bunch of animosity being thrown at this guy Edited August 10, 201015 yr by StrangeSox
August 10, 201015 yr Count me on the side of the guy filing the lawsuit. It was a known problem that baseball teams (and major league baseball) did nothing about until people starting getting hurt. When you file a lawsuit like this, your attorney goes after every pocket available... which is why Castillo and Castro are included. But what they really want is the deep pocket to kick in and settle. Baseball is lucky someone didn't get killed by one of those bats. They should have been banned BEFORE people started getting hurt. They were stupid to allow them to continue to be used, and the fact that they're now being taken to task for it should be no surprise. Edited August 10, 201015 yr by scenario
August 10, 201015 yr As always, I'm thinking more about the baseball impact this could have. More specifically, I'm curious what kind of effect this will have on the use of maple bats if the guy wins the suit. I'm also curious what kind of effect (if any) the minimization or outright ending of maple bat usage would have on offensive numbers, since a lot of guys use them. Edited August 10, 201015 yr by whitesoxfan101
August 10, 201015 yr QUOTE (RockRaines @ Aug 10, 2010 -> 09:04 AM) You cant win that suit, thats why they print that warning on the tickets. Good luck buddy. Sure he can. He's not arguing the bat hitting him, he's arguing the efforts of bats that were known to break more often being replaced. He has a case, and he's going to (and should) get paid. Edited August 10, 201015 yr by Steve9347
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.