Recently, there has been a lot of fan injuries at Major League Baseball games due to flying objects such as foul balls, broken balls, etc. One particular case is a fan who was injured from a foul ball at Fenway Stadium in Boston. Stephanie Taubin attended the Boston Red Sox vs. Minnesota Twins game on June 17, 2014. At the game, she was sitting behind home plate in an area that is usually protected by glass. However, when the foul ball went up it happened to hit Taubin leaving her with facial fractures and neurological damage. As long as there has been fans in attendance at baseball games, there have been accidents that have caused injuries. These injuries range from minor to severe from flying objects to fans falling off balconies. However, …show more content…
The plaintiff, Stephanie Taubin will look to sue John Henry for negligence and premise liability. She is going to have to provide the court with the with negligence claim: what was the duty of care of the defendant and how did that party breach the duty. In legal terms for premise liability and negligence, the owner is responsible for all of people on their property. Stephanie Taubin is looking to sue Henry because his duty is to provided protection for everyone on his property whether it be on the field, in the stands or in the parking lot. However, he breached his duty because he failed to provide the proper protection in a popular foul ball area. Henry decided to take the glass out for renovations leaving an unsafe environment for the fans at Fenway. The defendants' defense will be built around a disclaimer on the back of the ticket that makes the fans aware of the danger at a ball game. When a fan purchases a ticket at an MLB event, the disclaimer on the back states that the ticket holder is aware of all the risks and dangers at Fenway Park. The home team of the MLB event is looking to limit the legal liability by posting the disclaimer on the back. The defense will state that Taubin was aware of the risk that she may be hit with a flying object that could result in an
Ladies and gentlemen of the Jury. I am here to represent Justin Garcia, to prove the negligence of Jessica Nordeen. The law of negligence says that negligence occurs if an individual does something harmful that a person of ordinary intelligence would not do. In the next few moments,I will prove to the Jury that there was a breach of duty in the case of Garcia v. Nordeen.
In Gabriel Baumgaertner ‘s article titled MLB Must Mandate Expanded Protective Netting Before It’s Too Late, the author will argue as to why all baseball parks should have protective netting installed in all in front of lower level seating. It will also provide a strong reasons as to why players agree with protective netting. This paper will provide recent incidents of in detail of fans being struck by a hit ball that. Baumgaertner’s valid evidence will help support his argument and prove how important it is for Major League Baseball to make protective netting mandatory in the lower seating are of all ballparks before another fan gets killed.
McKichan v. St. Louis Hockey Club, L.P. was a personal injury case filed on March 17, 1998, in which the plaintiff claimed that the defendant club was vicariously liable for their employee’s actions that caused the plaintiff’s injury. The injury in question occurred in Peoria, Illinois during an IHL game on December 15, 1990 between the Peoria Rivermen and the Milwaukee Admirals. While the St. Louis Hockey Club technically wasn’t playing in the game, they can be held liable for the injury, as the Peoria Rivermen are a subsidiary of the club. During the third period of said game, the defendant, Stephen McKichan, a goalie for the Admirals, was both injured and rend unconscious by a body-check from a Peoria player. This body-check occurred after play was stopped due to the hockey puck floating out-of-bounds. Also, the defendant player ‘s body-check had occurred after the referee had blown his whistle twice to signal the play stoppage. After the injury, the defendant’s player received a game misconduct and a suspension. The player would also go on to settle with the plaintiff out
Watching my teammate, Misha take a line drive to the face from the pitcher 's mound gave me chills. That injury made a life-changing impact. Misha was put on a stretcher and rushed to the hospital. Therefore the possibilities of injuries are higher in
...time the athlete is just fine, but there is the small chance that the brain injury is worse than it appears. If I were in this situation, to me the health of the athlete is more important than winning a game. If the blow was an extremely hard hit than I would be worried for further injury of the brain, such as swelling and bleeding.
Here is a few bits of information about a baseball that is hit 400 feet.
The debate on artificial turf continues to rage on. Artificial turf has been structurally designed to be a safer surface than grass and to be unaffected by weather. Have engineers succeeded in their goal? It has been said that artificial turf has different properties than grass, and when forces act upon it, artificial turf reacts differently and causes more injuries. I have played the majority of my sports on artificial turf over the last couple years. I have always wondered if the artificial turf has any effect on injuries. Obviously I want to play on the safest surface possible. Is artificial turf that surface? This paper will answer the research question: In what ways does artificial turf affect player injuries?
Upon further investigation, baseball is more than just “One, two, three strikes you’re out,”there is a whole world of physics interacting and exerting itself upon the game, unseen to the human eye. So next time one sees a batter hit a home run off a knuckle ball at Coors Field in Denver, one will have a great appreciation for the physics of the game that came into play within that play.
During 1995, there were 35,200 reported emergency room treatment facial injuries due to head impact of a ball, with only ten percent occurring during offense (Deal, 1998). The increases in injuries lead to the creation of a mask designed for the other positions in softball. Remarkably though, the urgency for softball players to wear face masks seems most important while batting and catching compared to field positions, especially pitching. Over the years, there has been a positive relationship between the growth of facial injuries and the increased speed of play in fastball softball. As girls get older, the game gets faster, and the batters become better hitters with the ball coming off the bat at high rates, some of which needs more than just fast reactions. An athletic trainer with Topeka’s Cotton-O’Neil Clinic explains that if there is enough force put on the ball to fracture a cheekbone or nose, there is enough force to bruise the brain (Brunner, 2014). Players continue to resist masks and several remain to suffer from head injuries that could have been prevented. In 2014, there was 8,000 concussions with an overall twenty percent of all injuries in softball related to head and face impact (Ringor, 2014). The numbers are continuing to grow, especially without the implementation of the protective masks for pitchers in the NCAA (National
Negligence, as defined in Pearson’s Business Law in Canada, is an unintentional careless act or omission that causes injury to another. Negligence consists of four parts, of which the plaintiff has to prove to be able to have a successful lawsuit and potentially obtain compensation. First there is a duty of care: Who is one responsible for? Secondly there is breach of standard of care: What did the defendant do that was careless? Thirdly there is causation: Did the alleged careless act actually cause the harm? Fourthly there is damage: Did the plaintiff suffer a compensable type of harm as a result of the alleged negligent act? Therefore, the cause of action for Helen Happy’s lawsuit will be negligence, and she will be suing the warden of the Peace River Correctional Centre, attributable to vicarious liability. As well as, there will be a partial defense (shared blame) between the warden and the two employees, Ike Inkster and Melvin Melrose; whom where driving the standard Correction’s van.
In the case of Kolchek suing to recover for Litisha’s injuries, she can sure under the negligence liability. Every product should be fully tested in every way possible to see if the product functions correctly and will it injure individuals. There should not have been a whole that is not covered. Like stated in our book The Legal Environment of Business, “if a manufacture fails to exercise “due care” to make a product safe, a person who is injured by the product may sue the manufacture for negligence”. Kolchek could sue the manufacture. In this case which is Great Lakes spa. Porter was just a company that was selling the product. Great Lakes spa should have taken the initiative to examine their products throughly before putting it out on the make for individuals to buy. Like in our book The Legal Environment of Business stated, “A manufacture, seller, or lesser is liable for failure to exercise due care to any person who sustains an injury proximately caused by a negligently made (defective) product.”
When you or your loved one walks into a business or is invited onto private property , you expect to be walking into a safe environment. Business are responsible for taking certain measures to ensure the safety of you and your loved one. If you become injured because of a property owner 's failure to keep their property free from hazards, hidden or known, you may have a legal claim against the property owner. This is a premise liability case. Below are some frequently asked questions and answers regarding premise liability claims.
...sh someone down while kicking the soccer ball; elbow you on the face while playing basketball, getting hit by a baseball/softball, getting tackled by another football player. These are the most common injuries in sports.
Tort is the action that causes injury to persons or property (Epstein, 2011). There are three types of Tort, intentional, negligence, and strict liability. Intentional is the act of consciously committing harm to an individual (U.S. Legal, Inc., 2014). Strict liability is the result of unintentional consequences of harm or damage to persons or property not associated with the act that has caused the damage as a result of the primary action (U.S. Legal, Inc., 2014). Negligence is the harm or damage to persons or property due to the deficiency in taking precautionary measures to prevent such injuries (U.S. Legal, Inc., 2014). In sports or athletic events, the coach’s and the organization who is conducting the event is responsible for the safety of the athletes and spectators (U.S. Legal, Inc., 2014). Negligence in sports can occur when the coach or organization unintentionally overlooks the overall safety of those participating and an accident or injury occurs as a result of this oversight. Furthermore, there was no premeditated or conscious effort in creating a dangerous environment. Hence, the type of Tort that would be applied in this situation is negligence on behalf of those in
In our given scenario we are asked to discuss legal principles influencing the likelihood of any successful action against Steve in the grounds of negligence. Steve’s negligent driving caused a series of events that caused losses to the other people presented in the scenario and they take actions against Steve in the grounds of negligence. At first we must understand what negligence is. The tort of negligence provides the potenti...