Legal Acountability

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Not arguing either way but just pointing out that many cases of this type are settled out of court and conditions of confidentiality are included in the settlement.

And you know this to be true.....how?

Having both a personal [I umpire] and professional [I'm a trial lawyer during business hours] interest, I have made the same [ok - similar] search as Dave, and have made the same request: if anyone knows about a case where an umpire was ultimately held liable for on-field game-related injury, I'd like to know the details. No takers. The only cases I've ever heard of are a couple lightning-related suits.

The issue, however, is not ultimately liability. Simply being a defendant in such a suit for several months orf years can be quite expensive. Thus my advice to all sports officials:
1.) Do your job on safety issues; and
2.) Buy the insurance.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by cbfoulds

And you know this to be true.....how?

Are you denying that there are confidentiality conditions placed on some settlements? I'm not saying that's the case, just tossing it out as a possibility.

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Are you denying that there are confidentiality conditions placed on some settlements? I'm not saying that's the case, just tossing it out as a possibility.

The above [your question] IS NOT what you originally wrote and I responded to.

Originally Posted by waltjp

Not arguing either way but just pointing out that many cases of this type are settled out of court and conditions of confidentiality are included in the settlement.

While it certainly is true that SOME settlements have confidentiality conditions; VERY, VERY FEW lawsuits are "confidential" from their inception: the allegations and parties are almost always matters of public record. Suits naming sports officials as defendants are relatively rare, and usually the subject of some public notice, esp. within the officiating community, at the time they are filed. My initial post in this thread [and the question you quoted, but have, one notices, still failed to answer] was intended to challenge the [IMO] completely unfounded assertion which I have quoted [again] in this post.

[ctblu40]

There was a SP softball F1 that was hit in the face with a liner during a local beer league game a few years ago. He was also my mechanic and a good guy. He has lost partial eyesight due to his injury. He sued the bat manufacturer (Wilson I think) the ball manufacturer (Worth I think) as well as the town. I know he settled (less than 200k). He never named the umpires in his suit. The town was involved because the pitchers plate was 1.5 inches too close to home plate... and they built and maintain the fields. The same fields he played on for nearly 12 years.

He lost about 6 months work. I feel bad for the guy. But I feel that his and these types of suits are filed more out of opportunity than for necessity. IMO, that is sad.

[ManInBlue]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

There was a SP softball F1 that was hit in the face with a liner during a local beer league game a few years ago. He was also my mechanic and a good guy. He has lost partial eyesight due to his injury. He sued the bat manufacturer (Wilson I think) the ball manufacturer (Worth I think) as well as the town. I know he settled (less than 200k). He never named the umpires in his suit. The town was involved because the pitchers plate was 1.5 inches too close to home plate... and they built and maintain the fields. The same fields he played on for nearly 12 years.

He lost about 6 months work. I feel bad for the guy. But I feel that his and these types of suits are filed more out of opportunity than for necessity. IMO, that is sad.

I couldn't agree more. Neither Wilson nor Worth had anything to do with him getting hit or getting hurt.

[ctblu40]

I'm certainly not a good researcher, in fact, that is one reason I chose to major in math. But....


http://tinyurl.com/3xvxaa

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

I'm certainly not a good researcher, in fact, that is one reason I chose to major in math. But....


http://tinyurl.com/3xvxaa

Did you read this?
Quick run thru: 3 defense verdicts, 2 settlements, NO verdicts of liability [a settlement - BTW, I notice these settlements were NOT "confidential" - is not a judicial determination of liability: many settlements are economic decisions by insurance companies].

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

I'm certainly not a good researcher, in fact, that is one reason I chose to major in math. But....


http://tinyurl.com/3xvxaa

Note that gross negligence is not exempted in any state as are several other delimiters of liability. Gross is not as "gross" a term as you might expect when legally defined.

[ManInBlue]

Whoever has done the research has done one or two things -

1. Not researched thoroughly
2. Not given a definition of significant (issues involving sports official compared to what)

Before I get pummelled, I don't know where or how the research was done. These are just my conclusions, thus far.

I've heard of several lawsuits involving umpires. I don't know the details, where you can find the paperwork etc. I'm just stating that it seems odd that I would have heard of 3 or 4 issues, but research has found none (or not a significant #). Could be that what I've heard is a bunch of BS. I'll admit that, too.

One thing I know for a fact is that if I were named in a lawsuit from working a USSSA game, I would not even know about it and neither would anyone else in the organization. The U-trip insurance/lawyers handle it and it doesn't trickle down. That may have something to do with the difficulty in finding data and/or takers on the "give me your story" request.

Just putting in my $.02 - that probably isn't worth $.02

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by ManInBlue

Whoever has done the research has done one or two things -

1. Not researched thoroughly
2. Not given a definition of significant (issues involving sports official compared to what)

Before I get pummelled, I don't know where or how the research was done. These are just my conclusions, thus far.

I've heard of several lawsuits involving umpires. I don't know the details, where you can find the paperwork etc. I'm just stating that it seems odd that I would have heard of 3 or 4 issues, but research has found none (or not a significant #). Could be that what I've heard is a bunch of BS. I'll admit that, too.

One thing I know for a fact is that if I were named in a lawsuit from working a USSSA game, I would not even know about it and neither would anyone else in the organization. The U-trip insurance/lawyers handle it and it doesn't trickle down. That may have something to do with the difficulty in finding data and/or takers on the "give me your story" request.

Just putting in my $.02 - that probably isn't worth $.02

You are apparently missing the point:
We have ALL "heard of" any number of suits "involving" umpires: what we HAVEN'T heard of is liability judgments against those umpires for on-field, game-related injuries. Lightning injuries: yeah [I think 1]. Suits where officials were named, but where there were defense verdicts or dismissals in favor of the officials: absolute ****loads.

IF you have "heard of" a suit where the officials lost [not settled] for on-field, game-related injury, send me what info you know, & I'll check it out. O/w it falls in the category of urban legend.

AND, if you were a named defendant in a suit, you would damn sure know about it: a sherrif or other process server would deliver your own personal copy of the suit papers to you at home or work. THEN the U-trip Ins.Co. and lawyers would take over.

[ManInBlue]

Originally Posted by cbfoulds

IF you have "heard of" a suit where the officials lost [not settled] for on-field, game-related injury, send me what info you know, & I'll check it out. O/w it falls in the category of urban legend.

"lost," "settled" - I paid money to a plantiff --I f****ing lost, period. Other than legal jargon, I don't see the damn difference. And neither will my loan officer.

One case that comes to mind (and I don't know where it happened) to which I am willing to admit "urban legend" --

Two batters (on-deck) between innings, one takes a practice swing, not realizing where the other was standing, hit him. Parents sue umpires because they are responsible for safety on the field. If you can find info, please let me know what you find.

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by ManInBlue

"lost," "settled" - I paid money to a plantiff --I f****ing lost, period. Other than legal jargon, I don't see the damn difference. And neither will my loan officer.

One case that comes to mind (and I don't know where it happened) to which I am willing to admit "urban legend" --

Two batters (on-deck) between innings, one takes a practice swing, not realizing where the other was standing, hit him. Parents sue umpires because they are responsible for safety on the field. If you can find info, please let me know what you find.

YOU may not see the difference, but there is one.

A settlement is, usually, an economic decision made by an insurance company - the cost of trying the case [factoring in that MAYBE you lose] is greater than the cost of settlement. A verdict or judgment is a judicial determination that [in the circumstances being discussed here] someone [an umpire] failed to exercise "due care" where (s)he had a legal duty to do so.

Your one case, since we have no idea when, where, or to whom it happened, obviously cannot be checked out; however, I am aware of one such case with similar facts from about 5 to 7 years ago: there was no finding of liability [or settlement for that matter] against the umpires [in the case I have heard of] - the plaintiff was found to be contributorily negligent in a state where [unlike the infamous McD's coffee case] contributory negligence is an absolute bar to recovery. In such places [I live in one] the McD's plaintiff would get nothing, as she was found to be 20% negligent.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by ManInBlue

One thing I know for a fact is that if I were named in a lawsuit from working a USSSA game, I would not even know about it and neither would anyone else in the organization.

Wanna bet?

[Mountaineer]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Are you denying that there are confidentiality conditions placed on some settlements? I'm not saying that's the case, just tossing it out as a possibility.

Ummm, maybe I'm missing something but if the conditions and settlements were confidential - how would we know if they settled out of court.

We had a girl from here that was injured during a softball tournament in SC. She was pitching - NFHS - and the ball was illegal and the bat was illegal too. The ball hit her square in the face and completely shattered her jaw and chin - several reconstructions later - her parents chose not to pursue any legal matters against the tournament or the umpires. (Unless it was settled out of court - confidentially.) She's still playing college ball now, btw.