Y'all just catching on to what I've been saying for years?
Maybe H&B should file a countersuit against the estate of Mr. Patch.
After all, if he doesn't pitch the ball, the injury may not have occurred? If he threw the ball where the catcher set the target, maybe the catcher was a coconspirator?
I think the manufacturer of the plate, the organization which installed it and the rules makers should all be included as if the rules did not required Mr. Patch to throw the ball over that piece of rubber, the ball probably wouldn't have been hit back up the middle.
For that matter, the supplier who sold the bat provided the batter with THE deadly weapon, why is that company not liable?
But wasn't the pitcher wearing a glove? Was that to catch a batted ball? Why not catch it barehand? Was it because he WAS aware of the danger that a ball travelling at a high rate of speed could cause injury?
Was Mr. Patch as equally liable when he was using one of these deadly weapons? If he has used one, would he not be qualified to determine the danger of the instrument he used?
Shame on the jury for being stupid enough to buy this ****; shame on the family for being greedy and self-righteous; shame on the lawyer for being greedy and aiding in the inflation of the cost of insurance; And shame on the judge if she comes back with anything more than a USFL-type of award; and shame on everyone involved for not understanding that there is no proof that there is no proof that this would not have happened if the bat were made of wood.
Welcome to the United States of Someone Must Be Blamed and Pay Me!
If was a ****ing accident, PERIOD! End of story.
I suggest that the following warning be attached to EVERY item sold in EVERY store in EVERY state:
"If you believe this warning label is necessary and should be required, put this article back where you found it, you are not qualified to use it."
Nevermind. Then all the teachers and schools would be sued for not making sure everyone knows how to read!
