Little League lawsuit.

shotgunjim

Active Member
Messages
970
Just saw on the news that a Mom and Pop of some kid who was a pitcher, and was severely injured by a combacker is sueing Little League, Easton Aluminum, and the sporting goods store that sold the bat to the batter. WTF!!!!!!! No wonder the rest of the world hates Americans.
 
If true...WHAT A BUNCH OF BS!

4678aec03a21ae00.jpg
 
I agree, but even worse is the lawyer and judge who will present and take the case.......worst of all are those on the jury who will probably award millions. Oh yes, it could be the end of little league baseball.
 
It's unfortunate that any family should have to go through what this family is suffering, but that doesn't mean they should have the opportunity to make everyone else pay for their misfortune. Anytime someone, youth or adult, steps onto a sports field, they risk injury or in extreme cases, death. Minor to moderate injuries are common in most sports, including baseball. Most people understand that there is an assumed risk and choose to play anyway. Sometimes, bad injuries happen. It's part of competition and always will be. This family is taking advantage of the fact their son was injured by a ball that was hit by a metal bat and they're blaming everyone becuase 'metal bats hit the ball too hard.' It could just as easily have happened with a wood bat. As a case in point I'll tell you about the son of a web friend of mine....

Two summers ago, Erik Davis, who is a senior pitcher for Stanford University, was struck in the eye by a batted ball while pitching in the Cape Cod League. For those who aren't serious baseball fans, the Cape Cod League is the premier college wood bat summer league, attracting the nation's top collegiate players, many who end up going on to play pro baseball when they leave college. Erik's mom and dad were listening to the game online, from their home near Stanford. His dad told me that when they heard the announcer say that he'd been struck by a batted ball, they were worried, until they announcer said he was down and not moving and that paramedics had been summoned. Then, they were really concerned for his well being. When life flight was called in to fly their son to Boston, they were completely horrifed, hoping their son wasn't going to die before he could get to the hospital. Erik had to undergo several surgeries to repair his eye socket, the eye itself was ok though he did have some vision difficulties for a while, and he can't go through a metal detector anymore without setting it off as his socket is now made of titanium, not bone. He was back on the mound again eight weeks later, pitching in Reno. His mom and dad didn't sue the world, they knew it was an assumed risk for his to play the game he so loves, and he was taking his chances. The nice ending is that Erik's had an incedible year at Stanford this season and will likely be taken high in the Major League draft in June.

Amazing how different families handle similar situations, isn't it?
 
I played a little baseball. It is not an ability game, but one where achievement comes from LOTS of practice, borne of a passion. Congratulations on your son's achievements. AND on having the good sense to understand the principals of understanding risk/responsibility.
 
This lawsuit will not see a day in court. If it did the parents would more then likely loose on the grounds there is oblivious assumed dangers of playing baseball and no one was involved in being liable for neglect.
what the parent's attorney is banking on is that Eastman bat company and the sporting goods store has good insurance. That insurance company will figure up the bill for their attorneys to fight this in a court trial. If they come up with a figure of say 60-70 thousand for a 4-5 day trial, they will turn around and offer the plantiff's attorney a settlement figure of 35-40 thousand dollars, which is cheaper then fighting it and winning the case.
the parents agree and and take their 60-65 percent and the ambulance chasing attorney will get 35-40 percent for filing the paper work with the court.
All of us pay higher costs for insurance to cover the lost to the insurance company. What we need is a law in place that requires the plaintiff to pay all costs of both sides, if they sue and loose the case in court, in order to stop these frivious lawsuits. Then watch the shyster lawyers scream to high heaven when their meal ticket is taken away.

RELH
 
RELH, I am not so sure if they'll handle this case like you suggest. I agree that insurance defense will likely treat the case as you suggest, but this time equipment manufacturers have too much on the line to set such a precedent with an easy settlement. I won't be surprised if Easton fights this one. If they don't, they'll be inviting lawsuits from every player who ever gets hit with a ball and injured.
 
Eastman may not have any say on how it is handled if they have a outside insurance company. It will be that insurance company that makes the decision to fight or pay. Now if Eastman is self insured, then it might be a different story.
I have seen many of these lawsuits, and if a insurance company is going to be the one paying, they will have the final word on fighting it. I mentioned to a insurance claims investigator once about them doing away with the ideal of paying out money on frivious lawsuits as a settlement to make the person suing go away. He told me it would be a poor business practice when they can just past on the fees to their clients in the way of higher insurance premiums.
We need tougher law suit laws, but since most of our law makers are attorneys, they will not pass tougher laws that cut into the pocket book of their brother lawyers.
You did notice that the kid who hit that ball was not sued, this is a "deep pocket" law suit looking for a out of court settlement.

RELH
 
I looked it up. It's not Easton. It's actually Hillerich and Bradsbury. That matters not, but that was the manufacturer. The kid was a 12-year old pitcher and the game was 2 years ago. The ball hit him in the chest.

You guys may well be correct about "how" it will be handled. In this case, ANY one who helps facilitate (that means the legal boys) this kind of crap, should be ashamed of themselves. This lawsuit is particularly obvious, but MOST of our product-liability suits have the same moral value.
 
Thing that alot of people dont know is that the bat was altered. Just like in slow pitch softball...People can send there bats away to "bat doctors" and have the walls of the bat shaved down a little to make the ball pop of the bat alot faster. I have hit one of these bats befor. It added 70 feet to my homeruns and the ball flew through the infield. same with LL. These idiot parents are sending there kids bats away to be shaved. A stock bat is rated to hit a ball at 98 MPH. After the work is done the ball can go over 140 and thats a HUGE advantage. Sad thing is that most kids dont know there cheating. Parents just want the braging rights. Sad


nevadaanimatedhelmetwd2.gif
 
What I don't understand is if they work over the bats, do they then place the authorizing labels back on? They must since Little League baseball has requirements that bats have to have their approval label on them and also, starting in 2009, have to have the BPF rating listed. Max BPF is 1.15.
 
If the bat is altered, it is a easy out for the bat company. but we come back to the business of paying 30 thousand to make the parents lawyer go away Vs. 50-60 thousand to go to court and fight it out in a civil jury trail. The only big winners on these are the lawyers on both sides.

RELH
 
LAST EDITED ON May-20-08 AT 05:19PM (MST)[p]They ought to sue their own son...he is the one that started the whole process by throwing a P.O.S. belt high fastball to the other kid when the catcher and coach had called for a slider in the dirt! Its his own damn fault. Make a better pitch and you wont get hit!

just another opinion.

edit* and no little league is not too young to throw junk....we all threw junk when i was playing LL.

47aa8a9e202b0d9f.jpg
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom