Legal Acountability

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by canadaump6

A few years ago, a pair of umpires allowed the players to continue playing into the sixth inning just for fun, even though the game should have been a mercy rule after the fifth. Somebody got hurt, and the umpires got sued. So yes these types of things do happen on the ball diamond. People do not want to take responsibility for their own actions. I think in this case the parents of the kid that got hurt should be sueing themselves for not pulling him off the field. That would make more sense than sueing the umpires. Of course everyone likes to put their blame on the umpires.

Civil law has an importeant functions and many important abuses. Along with authority comes exposure. There a few immunities but have it any other way, not a chance.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by cbfoulds

In order to take this out of urban legend status, it would be necessary to know at least some of the "who, where, when..." You know any of this info, or is this just something "everybody has heard"?

Lets suppose there never ever has been a succesful lawsuit. Are you willing to support the argument that since it is a legend that the consequences cannot be severe? That its a frivolous act to take every precaution that you are not the first?

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by Tim C

Fit,We have two attorneys on the committee.

My applause, so few do. Serious congrats.

For the record, following my criteria as listed above there is still no listing of any contest official having been found at fault and been successfully sued.

That is still no reason not to purchase insurance that is available to all officials. You don't want to be the first.

Have your legal beagles do a thourough search of cases at the state, circuit and lower court levels. They will find the cases most of which have been settled, a few lost, many lost then overturned. There have been many "firsts".
Have them call your insurors and have them point to the cases, they sure as hell know and if they cannot, ask them why your rates are so high for a nonexistent liability.

It's not the damages awarded that will sink you, it is the cost of defending yourself, your org, your assets and your reputation (future income).

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by fitump56

Lets suppose there never ever has been a succesful lawsuit. Are you willing to support the argument that since it is a legend that the consequences cannot be severe? That its a frivolous act to take every precaution that you are not the first?

Since I'm pretty sure you've read what I wrote previously in this thread, you know I am not making your first argument.

To reiterate: buy the insurance!

As for the second: kinda depends upon what you actually mean by "every precaution", don't it?

My first "applies to all cases" piece of advice [also in previous posts, above]: DO YOUR JOB RE: SAFETY RULES.

The point of my comments about the "legend" staus of many of these "reports" [including, by the way, yours] is this: it is possible to get one's shorts in such a wad about avoiding any possible source of liability that it seems the only rational response is to retreat inside, lock the doors and never come out. It is silly to get all that worked up by a liability where there are, by every reasonable measure, NO INSTANCES where there has ever been a final judgment imposing liability for negligence on an umpire for game-related injury. [So we're clear: lightning a different story, ditto INTENTIONAL misconduct, such as assault] Does that mean you can't be/ won't be sued by some dolt for calling Johnny out ["when he was CLEARLY safe"] in the final inning of the Big Game and thereby ruining his future and costing him and his parents millions in deeply felt emotional distress? [or something equally silly] Noooo... but that's not the point, is it? You may get sued, but they won't win. So: DO YOUR JOB, and BUY THE INSURANCE; and you can umpire your games with "the calm assurance of a christian holding four aces."

fit... I've DONE the "search" you have repeatedly suggested would disclose "many" of these judgments ... I know of at least two insurance companies that have researched the industry databases looking for such suits ... the results are always the same: nothing to report.

That's why those of us interrested in this issue [me, Tee, Hensley, others] keep asking; IF YOU KNOW ABOUT ONE OF THESE: TELL US THE DETAILS so we can go look it up. Pretending you know someting we don't and all that is neccesary is to "go look it up": without providing a single party's name, not one Court or case citation, not even a locality and date is just bogus.

If you know: tell... o/w you clearly don't know, except what "everybody knows".. which is what makes "urban legends".

[Tim C]

Our two legal counsel ran the same reports that fitump56 suggested and there simply are no judgements to be found.

Nada.

Nil.

I have waited for fitump56 to quote one and he has evaded the issue.

I too suggest that all officials buy the insurance that is available.

I too suggest that every official be aware of hazzards associated with their games.

I too teach to err on the "safety" side.

~SIGH~

I deal with officiating legal issues nationwide. And we have never found an official to be held responsible in a legal decision.

That is all that I am trying to say.

Yours' is a great post.

Regards,

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by cbfoulds

Since I'm pretty sure you've read what I wrote previously in this thread, you know I am not making your first argument.

To reiterate: buy the insurance!

As for the second: kinda depends upon what you actually mean by "every precaution", don't it?

My first "applies to all cases" piece of advice [also in previous posts, above]: DO YOUR JOB RE: SAFETY RULES.

The point of my comments about the "legend" staus of many of these "reports" [including, by the way, yours] is this: it is possible to get one's shorts in such a wad about avoiding any possible source of liability that it seems the only rational response is to retreat inside, lock the doors and never come out. It is silly to get all that worked up by a liability where there are, by every reasonable measure, NO INSTANCES where there has ever been a final judgment imposing liability for negligence on an umpire for game-related injury. [So we're clear: lightning a different story, ditto INTENTIONAL misconduct, such as assault] Does that mean you can't be/ won't be sued by some dolt for calling Johnny out ["when he was CLEARLY safe"] in the final inning of the Big Game and thereby ruining his future and costing him and his parents millions in deeply felt emotional distress? [or something equally silly] Noooo... but that's not the point, is it? You may get sued, but they won't win. So: DO YOUR JOB, and BUY THE INSURANCE; and you can umpire your games with "the calm assurance of a christian holding four aces."

fit... I've DONE the "search" you have repeatedly suggested would disclose "many" of these judgments ... I know of at least two insurance companies that have researched the industry databases looking for such suits ... the results are always the same: nothing to report.

That's why those of us interrested in this issue [me, Tee, Hensley, others] keep asking; IF YOU KNOW ABOUT ONE OF THESE: TELL US THE DETAILS so we can go look it up. Pretending you know someting we don't and all that is neccesary is to "go look it up": without providing a single party's name, not one Court or case citation, not even a locality and date is just bogus.

If you know: tell... o/w you clearly don't know, except what "everybody knows".. which is what makes "urban legends".

Simply put... this is a fantastic post. On point, never resorting to name calling, and a good way to summarize this thread!
Nicely done cb.

[TussAgee11]

Several years ago in NJ a CF was struck by the FIRST bolt of lightning. The case did go to trial, and one of our association members had to go down there from CT and be an expert witness.

The poor kid was dead by the time anyone got to him. The parents clearly needed somebody to blame. I think this is just human nature, everyone needs a scapegoat.

I'm not sure of the outcome of the trial (perhaps settlement).

Stuff does happen and we COULD be in a heap of trouble, but all-in all, I think most sueing stories are just rumors.

Still, I don't think it hurts to ask if a team is properly equipped, even though nobody has been sued for not doing it.

Frankly, being sued, even for something stupid, is not an ordeal I wish to go through, so I'll take a couple of precautions on the field that don't effect how I do my job, as an umpire.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by fitump56
Lets suppose there never ever has been a succesful lawsuit. Are you willing to support the argument that since it is a legend that the consequences cannot be severe? That its a frivolous act to take every precaution that you are not the first?

Originally Posted by cbfoulds

Since I'm pretty sure you've read what I wrote previously in this thread, you know I am not making your first argument.

To reiterate: buy the insurance!

As for the second: kinda depends upon what you actually mean by "every precaution", don't it?

My first "applies to all cases" piece of advice [also in previous posts, above]: DO YOUR JOB RE: SAFETY RULES.

This would fit my definition of being non-frivolous.

The point of my comments about the "legend" staus of many of these "reports" [including, by the way, yours] is this: it is possible to get one's shorts in such a wad about avoiding any possible source of liability that it seems the only rational response is to retreat inside, lock the doors and never come out. It is silly to get all that worked up by a liability where there are, by every reasonable measure, NO INSTANCES where there has ever been a final judgment imposing liability for negligence on an umpire for game-related injury.

Wrong, cited in this thread are instances.

...You may get sued, but they won't win. So: DO YOUR JOB, and BUY THE INSURANCE; and you can umpire your games with "the calm assurance of a christian holding four aces."

Truly naive advice, truly naive.

fit... I've DONE the "search" you have repeatedly suggested would disclose "many" of these judgments ... I know of at least two insurance companies that have researched the industry databases looking for such suits ... the results are always the same: nothing to report.

So have we, you need a new search engine or a new searcher.

That's why those of us interrested in this issue [me, Tee, Hensley, others] keep asking; IF YOU KNOW ABOUT ONE OF THESE: TELL US THE DETAILS so we can go look it up. Pretending you know someting we don't and all that is neccesary is to "go look it up": without providing a single party's name, not one Court or case citation, not even a locality and date is just bogus.

Then if you believe my claims are bogus, what worries have you? Go along your merry way and hang your house on your naive advce and stance on this subject noted above.

If you know: tell... o/w you clearly don't know, except what "everybody knows".. which is what makes "urban legends".

Asked and answered within this thread.

Which leads back to the premise,

Lets suppose there never ever has been a succesful lawsuit. Are you willing to support the argument that since it is a legend that the consequences cannot be severe?

For you see, or don't, it makes relatively little diff if I or you are right or wrong. Good biz practices prepares for ALL possibilities and beiong sued as an ump or ump org is absolutely, positively the kind of thing that can create ultimate havoc and the dissolution of your earning potential and the orgs very existence. Nothing else can but this kind of legal action.

[cbfoulds]

fit: I've been trying, as has Tee, to take you seriously in this thread.

While I suspected it would be a waste of time: still, I tried.

"There have been instances cited in this thread": false statement. The cases actually cited [as in: described with sufficient information to determine if the relator is telling the truth or merely repeating a "legend"] do not include a singel instance where the umpire has been found negligent in a final judgment for game-related injury. I know you can read, so your repeating this false statement is not merely error, it is a lie.

"Naive advice" is a matter of opinion; the value of the opinion having a great deal to do with the value of the opiner, or at least the extent to which that person is well-informed and well-intentioned, and their reputation for well-reasoned opinion. I'm not real worried about the outcome if anyone compares the two of us on either score.

For anyone who still gives a damn about the actual topic here: Do your job; err if you must, on the side of safety [just don't invent rules to do so]; buy the blinking insurance; and until they can cite some actual, verifiable, case, not just legends of what they "know", but won't tell - ignore the chicken-littles, both on the Boards and out in the world - who want to make you think that there are lawsuits under every base, waiting to leap out and bite you. At best, they are mistaken: at worst, they are lying blowhards.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by cbfoulds

fit: I've been trying, as has Tee, to take you seriously in this thread.

While I suspected it would be a waste of time: still, I tried.

"There have been instances cited in this thread": false statement. The cases actually cited [as in: described with sufficient information to determine if the relator is telling the truth or merely repeating a "legend"] do not include a singel instance where the umpire has been found negligent in a final judgment for game-related injury. I know you can read, so your repeating this false statement is not merely error, it is a lie.

"Naive advice" is a matter of opinion; the value of the opinion having a great deal to do with the value of the opiner, or at least the extent to which that person is well-informed and well-intentioned, and their reputation for well-reasoned opinion. I'm not real worried about the outcome if anyone compares the two of us on either score.

For anyone who still gives a damn about the actual topic here: Do your job; err if you must, on the side of safety [just don't invent rules to do so]; buy the blinking insurance; and until they can cite some actual, verifiable, case, not just legends of what they "know", but won't tell - ignore the chicken-littles, both on the Boards and out in the world - who want to make you think that there are lawsuits under every base, waiting to leap out and bite you. At best, they are mistaken: at worst, they are lying blowhards.

Amen.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by Tim C

Our two legal counsel ran the same reports that fitump56 suggested and there simply are no judgements to be found.

Nada.

Nil.

Hire new counsel.


Pantalope vs Lenap, '76 PA

and

"Amateur referees at softball diamonds, high school stadiums, and college field houses are finding that their decisions can trigger major-league lawsuits. * * * A New Jersey umpire was sued by a catcher who was hit in the eye by a softball while playing without a mask; he complained that the umpire should have lent him his. The catcher walked away with $24,000"

As I said, I have hundreds more and if your legal can't find them, fire them.

I have waited for fitump56 to quote one and he has evaded the issue.

Yeah, right. I post approximately 30 minutes in any day, mostly well after work. Do your own homework.

If you want to believe that umpires are not culpable, go for it. If you want to believe that umpires don't go broke resolving lawsuits, fine with me. Pull your head into your turtle shell and live there.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by cbfoulds

fit: I've been trying, as has Tee, to take you seriously in this thread.

While I suspected it would be a waste of time: still, I tried.

"There have been instances cited in this thread": false statement.

I have had at least three posts with evidence either deleted or edited, I'm through here.

[Tim C]

FitUmp56 wrote:

" . . . I'm through here."

Again, as it is with many of your posts, this is unclear:

Does this comment mean you are done with this thread or done posting on this site?

Also Donavan, I listed the catcher umpire law suit. If you research further you'll find that the original ruling was over turned on appeal.

Now of us are asking you to do our research. We just have problems with many of the things you say. And none of us have even remotely endorsed that umpires are not culpable in any situation -- we have just tried to place sanity in the discussion.

All of us know it is inevitable that a umpire will be sued (or an umpire association) and we all endorse buying the insurance.

Regards,

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by fitump56

I have had at least three posts with evidence either deleted or edited, I'm through here.

To the extent that's true, the deletion or editing had nothing to do with the "evidence" you posted.

[BayStateRef]

I have had two experiences with doing the "right" thing legally...and neither was much fun. I may not do this for fun, but it does get incredible to watch the reaction from coaches and parents when the professional official imposes safety over all other factors.

This summer, Babe Ruth level. The bases are the kind with a square peg that is inserted into a square "donut" in the ground. The bases were not sitting properly because the bottom of the hole was filled with dirt. I would not start the game until all three bases were safely on the dirt. The home coach started at third base -- and after five minutes of digging with the wrong tool (he did not know there was a "right" tool or where to find it), he starts complaining that it is not his job to do this -- he is just a volunteer coach and someone else -- the town, the high school, the baseball association -- should do it right. I tell him that it is the home team's responsibility and we are not playing if the field is not safe. A couple of minutes more of unsuccessful digging -- and he says a few magic words to me that earn him an ejection before his team takes the field. A mom comes stomping onto the field, grabs the proper tool that has suddenly emerged from the equipment shed, and digs all three bases clear. After the game, I got more than an earful from this mom and a couple of other parents. They truly did not care about safety. They just wanted to play.

My other incident was a few years back in basketball. Massachusetts required all players have full mouthguards for all games and scrimmages. During a varsity scrimmage, I was asked by two parents who I knew -- one a fellow official and the other the wife of a lawyer -- if I noticed that their team did not have mouthguards. I asked the coach about it...and he said he told the players they did not need them since it was "only" a scrimmage. I ended the scrimmage right then. My partner thought I was wrong. The coach of the other team...which had driven almost an hour (and which had mouthguards) thought I was wrong. (The instructions from the MIAA were absolutely clear...mouthguards are required in scrimmages. The mouthguard rule was eliminated this year after many complaints from players and coaches.)

None of us officiate to win popularity contests. But it is really amazing how little support and respect we get when we insist on safety.