Jury decision against bat manufacturer
 

Stolen from another board:

From the Billings Gazette:


UPDATED 6 P.M. : HELENA - A jury on Wednesday found that the maker of Louisville Slugger baseball bats failed to adequately warn about the dangers the product can pose, awarding a family $850,000 for the 2003 death of their son in a baseball game.

The family of Brandon Patch argued that aluminum baseball bats are dangerous because they cause the baseball to travel at a greater speed. They contended that their 18-year-old son did not have enough time to react to the ball being struck before it hit him in the head while he was pitching in an American Legion baseball game in Helena in 2003.

The Lewis and Clark County District Court jury awarded a total of $850,000 in damages against Hillerich & Bradsby for failure to place warnings on the product.

The teen's mother, Debbie Patch, was stunned by the verdict. The family rejoiced and cried as the verdict was read.

"We never expected it," she said. "We just hoped we could get the truth out for more people to see."

Patch said she hopes the decision will make more people aware of the dangers associated with aluminum bats and that more youth leagues will switch to using wooden bats.

"We just want to save someone else's life," Patch said.

The attorneys for Hillerich & Bradsby declined to comment. They had argued that accidents are bound to happen in baseball games and there's nothing inherently unsafe about aluminum baseball bats.

Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association's Don't Take My Bat Away Program, a sporting goods trade group, said that while Patch's death is tragic, the exact same thing could have happened with a wooden bat.

Curt Drake, one of the family's attorneys, said the jury arrived at the total by awarding $792,000 to Brandon Patch for his lost earnings and pain and suffering, an amount that goes to his estate. The family was awarded $58,000 for their pain and suffering and damages.

Judge Kathy Seeley is still considering punitive damages in the case.

In the verdict Wednesday, the jury also decided the product was not defective. Drake said that decision was not significant, since the jury found it posed a threat without an adequate warning label.

The attorney said the family's victory will not likely change the way aluminum bats are used, but that it could help give momentum to efforts calling for a switch to wood bats in youth baseball.

Metal bats came into vogue in amateur sports in the 1970s, but professional baseball still uses wood bats. Some amateur teams have decided to switch in recent years, in part due to Patch's death.

"We should go back to the way baseball is supposed to be played, the way professional baseball is played," said Debbie Patch.

Brandon Patch was pitching for the Miles City Mavericks when the ball ricocheted off his head, eventually falling behind first base after traveling as high as 50 feet in the air.

Patch went into convulsions on the field in front of a horrified crowd and died within hours from his injury.

I'm going to be the a@@hole here.

I think this is an absolute shame.

I have deep sympathies for the family for the horribly tragic loss of their son. However, why must someone always be found responsible for everything in this country? Why can't people accept the fact that sh1t just happens? Must there always be a guilty culprit for every incident?

And why the bat manufacturer? Why not the league? Or the batter? Apparently, the lawyer felt the pockets of LS extend too deeply.

Nah, you're not being the a-hole. You are expressing what I was thinking as I read this. Actually, my thinking would probably make me more of the a-hole. I was thinking, "are you serious? They had no clue that aluminum bats causes the ball to travel at greater speeds? Where have they been the past two or three decades? Would they have really read the warning had it been posted on the bat? Sounds like they found a really devious albeit adroit legal mind to work the system so that they could all profit from a tragic loss." Those were the kinds of thoughts I was having!

Yeah, I tempered my a@@hole-ishness. ;)

Do we really need a warning label on EVERYTHING?! Does a pitcher need a warning label on his jersey if he can throw a 90+ MPH fastball?

I suspect this will be appealed and greatly reduced (if not eliminated).

Ucking Fidiots...

By their own reasoning about a warning label. Should the label have not been on the ball instead of the bat? After all, the pitcher is the one holding the ball, it would be kind of hard for them to read a warning label on a bat from 60' 6" away.

And I suppose they have never seen a wood bat shatter and fly at players on the field or into the stands. I remember seeing a photo of a minor league pitcher being carted off the field a few years back with a huge shard of bat sticking out of his arm. Im sorry for their loss, but its no wonder MLB requires the bat manufacturers to carry a 20 mil liability policy in order to supply bats.

There was a woman a few years ago who was injured at a Rangers' game I was attending, when the bat flew out of the batter's hands. Using the logic of this lawsuit, she should be able to sue the bat manufactuer for not placing a label on the bat stating that a flying bat can cause serious injury. (Does no one have common sense anymore?) She should also be able to sue the pine tar maker, because, obviously, their product failed completely. She should also be able to sue the player, since he wasn't using either the bat or the pine tar as they were intended. The stadium, for not supplying warning labels on everything in the park, the vendor who had her distracted because he was giving her whatever it was she had just purchased from him, and so on and so on ad nauseum.

In short, accidents happen! No matter how large or how small the accident, we must assume certain risks in life, or else cease living all together.

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!:o

If was a ****ing accident, PERIOD! End of story. :mad:

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! :(

Here is the statement released from H&B:

this is one of the few reason why america sucks. the kid is 18 years old, has probably been playing baseball for 10yrs and most likely had been using aluminum bats the whole time. instead of accepting the fact they knew this could happen, they sue bc it did.

the way i read the article, if there was a warning label on the bat, the manufacturer would not have been liable. i have a hard time believing that the 18 yr would not have pitched if the aluminum bat had a warning label on it.

this reminds me of the screens i have on my windows, they have a warning on them saying the screen will not prevent a child from falling out of the window, NO SHlT!! anyone who believes it would, shouldnt be allowed to propagate.

[My screens] have a warning on them saying the screen will not prevent a child from falling out of the window . . . anyone who believes it would, shouldn't be allowed to propagate.

Warning labels are for the 0.01% of the population smart enough to know to read a warning label, but stupid enough not to know that you shouldn't poke a pencil in your eye.

The best warning label I ever saw was in Toys 'R' Us, on the package of a "Superman" costume:

Warning: The wearing of this costume does not enable the wearer to fly.

If we wrapped every LL batter in a mattress, we would save the two or three kids killed every decade by a pitch that hits near the heart. But there would be no way to know how many kids didn't want to wear the mattress and so decided not to play, and then got killed doing something more dangerous. So we have to acknowledge that and try to strike a balance between safety and ruining the game.

I agree with H&B that failure to provide a warning label was a big stretch, because in the case of a bat, it's not as if there's some common misuse that you need to avoid, or some trick to using it safely, or some aspect that might be counterintuitive. But I disagree with what they find contradictory. I think a non-defective product can still be dangerous. (Anti-gun groups tried to sue manufacturers of firearms for the results of their misuse by criminals, and the courts uniformly held that unless the gun was defective, they had no case. Even then, though your Glock might not be defective, you should still read the directions.) If the bat was substantively the same as the millions of others being used around the country, then H&B should not be held responsible. If the bat was juiced to be hotter than the other bats, that's a different story. But the legalities of this specific case aside, the larger question is, Have baseball and softball become inherently and unnecessarily dangerous, and if they have, are the bats part of the problem?

Before metal bats, nobody seriously tried to make a case that youth baseball was inherently unreasonably dangerous. (Of course, the legal atmosphere was different then, too.) So how many annual deaths or facial disfigurements are "acceptable"? Yes, a freak accident can happen with a wooden bat, but there have also been cases in which the guy who crashed his car might have survived if he hadn't been sober and wearing a seatbelt. Would banning all metal bats change the overall picture? Banning certain bats? If there were clear evidence that injuries could be reduced or prevented by changing back to wooden bats, shouldn't we make the change? Unfortunately, a truly scientific study in this area would be extremely difficult to conduct, with so many levels of play, so many types of bats, so much difference in talent within the various pools of ballplayers. The "gold standard," a random assignment study, would not be feasible.

My own feeling is that metal bats overall have made baseball and softball more dangerous, but to varying degrees within the various levels. Little if any difference in under-12 baseball and FP. But a great difference in SP at all levels, with particular danger in coed and company leagues where huge differences in playing ability are common.

Well, that depends on whether they removed that damn tag or not, wouldn't it? You know, the one that states, "Do not remove under penalty of law".:D

No, they are actually for defense lawyers to read to juries during personal injury trials.

Man! Am I so glad that I read this before tomorrow night! ;)

Someone needs to talk to Red Bull, then.

The steroid of Gen X