Should assumption of risk doctrine still apply to baseball? Lawyer who filed class action thinks not
Yankee Stadium. Mike Liu / Shutterstock.com
A lawyer who filed a class action against Major League Baseball this summer says the assumption of risk doctrine should no longer protect teams from suits by injured fans.
Bob Hilliard is among the class-action lawyers who claim that baseball commissioner Rob Manfred failed to protect against the danger of foul balls and broken bats through a pattern of negligence and misrepresentation, the New York Times reports.
Hilliard told the Times that baseball should not be protected from suit because the players are getting bigger and stronger, seats for fans are closer to the foul lines in newer stadiums, and the teams offer attractions that distract fans from keeping their eye on team play.
The Times article cites Bloomberg News statistics that bolster the case against baseball: About 1,750 people are hurt during baseball games each year, mainly from foul balls and broken bats.
The article also recites allegations in a suit that takes another tack. The plaintiff, Andy Zlotnick, says he was injured by a foul ball in a game at Yankee Stadium in August 2011 because his view was blocked by open umbrellas. He found that the Yankees were like many other teams in that they allowed umbrellas as long as they didn’t interfere with fans’ enjoyment of the game. Eight teams, however, ban umbrellas except during rain delays.
Zlotnick’s suit, filed in late 2012, alleges the Yankees’ umbrella policy negligently increased the danger of the game. A motion for summary judgment filed by the Yankees is still pending.
Hat tip to How Appealing.
