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…
Taubin's case is different because of the spot in which she was sitting. Usually at Fenway Park there is glass protecting the EMC Club in which she was sitting. However, they had recently taken the glass out for renovation, which resulted in Taubin's injury. In this particular case, if Stephanie Taubin was going to file a lawsuit for the injuries that she suffered, she would look to sue the owner of the stadium, John Henry.
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
injury. Also, the defense will use the assumption of risk on the plaintiff. Taubin took the risk to sit in the EMC Club area even though it was not protected by glass. There were signs warning fans that the glass was removed and the dangers that this may cause. The defense will state that the there have been cases where fans have tried to sue the MLB or the team owners because of a foul ball or a flying object, but have been unsuccessful. I believe Taubin has a strong case against the owner of the Red Sox and will win this case. Taubin was not injured with life threatening injuries, however, she was still injured at the baseball game. This injury could have been prevented if John Henry replaced the glass right away when he took it out for renovation. If Taubin's was sitting in a section that is not normally protected by glass, Taubin's case would not hold up. However, because the glass was removed from a section that was protected I believe Taubin's case will hold up. I don't agree with my predicted decision because of the fact fans should be aware of their surroundings. Everyone knows the risks associated with attending baseball games and should be responsible for their own well-being. That is not to say that I believe the MLB and owners should not be responsible for better protecting the fans. I believe there should be netting around the field to protect the fans, but that is complete different argument.
There were no concealed, unreasonably increased risks present at the time of the incident. D’Agostino graduated Massapequa High School in 2000. When the plaintiff’s injury caused, D’Agostino was 27 years old and weighed 275 pounds. When he was in high school, he wrestled for all four years, and he won some championship. On the other hand, the plaintiff was 6’2”, weighted 275. He was under age. He had many experiences of wrestling because he wrestled from 7th grade through 12th grade. Thus, they were almost in the same situation, except for their
They reasoned that since Barnett didn’t either argue against the dismissal of negligence claim at the time of its dismissal or include the claim in subsequent revisions, she had no support for her claim that the court had erred in dismissing her claim of negligence. The court also ruled that the language of section 3-108(b) of the Tort Immunity Act meant that complete, unconditional immunity was to be offered if supervision was present. As a result of this interpretation, the issue of if the lifeguards had committed willful and wanton misconduct was rendered irrelevant. Since the issues of material fact raised by the appellant weren’t actually issues of material fact, the Supreme Court affirmed the District and Appellate Court’s motion and subsequent affirmation of summary
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 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.”
The high speeds of hit baseballs make it very dangerous for fans that sit at or near the front rows of a ballpark. Many players were affected recently when a line drive of the bat of a player struck a toddler in the face. The players are pressuring the league to protect the fans sitting in the lower levels. Not only fans are in danger, but even coaches are in danger too. One coach lost his life when he was struck by a line drive at a baseball game. In that case the league made it mandatory for all coaches on the field to wear helmets. The players in the dugouts are also being protected by netting installed on the dugout rails. If players and coaches are protected, then fans should be protected
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.
Would mandated regulations for bat usage at all levels of baseball provide a safer environment for the sport and reduce costs. Decades of debating over these questions leaves people in disagreement. When it comes to discussing the use of metal bats from Little League to the Majors cost, safety, and performance are among the currently most heavily debated topics, with wide spread disagreement among people in the industry. Complicating the debates, especially the safety debate, is the fact that little scientific, researched based, safety studies have been conducted.
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.
Here is a few bits of information about a baseball that is hit 400 feet.
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.
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?
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
...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