|
Wed Aug 13, 2003, 08:39am
|
|||
|
|||
|
As I read various threads on this and other softball forums, I see frequent references to paranoia over lawsuits. I know there must be a basis for this.
I know in the years I've been around softball, I have never seen a situation that would call for a lawsuit nor have I ever heard anyone (fans, coaches, etc) discuss the possibility of bringing one. I would be interested in hearing about some actual lawsuits that have been brought and the situation that caused them.
__________________
MCPO(SW) USN(Ret.) Softball Addict Mississippi Gulf Coast 
|
|
Wed Aug 13, 2003, 09:29am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Last year, Bollinger settled a death due to lightning lawsuit for $1.5 million. Many cases settle out prior to getting to the courtroom and are not publicized as a matter of detering others from filing frivilous suits. And on top of that, the liability insurance included in an ASA umpire's registration was halved to $5 million this year. Just because we are covered is no reason to feel comfortable and relax our awareness of the possibility of litigation. Remember, it isn't just the player, but their insurer retains the right to recoup any expenses incurred through the filing of a claim by an individual or group.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Wed Aug 13, 2003, 09:45am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
In the case of lightning, umpire's most definitely do have a responsibility to exercise due care and diligence in suspending the game due to threatening weather, darkness, etc. This can easily form the basis for a lawsuit if someone is injured or killed.
__________________
Tom
|
|
Wed Aug 13, 2003, 09:58am
|
|||
|
|||
|
One of our guys was named in a lawsuit.
He was one-man umpiring a co-ed league where the players all live in a large condominium development. I've filled in there, and it's low-level play. Women hit a smaller ball. Games are usually very high scoring, as few players can field the ball. No lights. Four-inning games of 29-23 are the norm. They have some limit to the number of runs or batters in an inning, and that often is what ends the inning. Throughout the league, there are a few former Little League heroes who think they are in the big leagues. (Many readers will probably feel that such a league is inherently unsafe.) The fields are in the center of this sea of condos. The management mows the grass, but that's about all the maintenance that is done. Nobody ever lines the fields or does any raking, so you can imagine what the batter's boxes and infield look like. They throw down rubber squares for bases. Here's what happened: Runner on 2B, batter gets a base hit to the outfield. Runner rounds 3B and heads for home. However, when he is halfway home, he tries to reverse direction, and slips and falls on the grass, which was a little wet from an afternoon shower. Runner tears up his knee and is carted off to the hospital. (Don't know whether or not they tagged him out.) Lawsuit claims that as the runner was approaching the plate, he remembered that the near corner of the plate was sticking up. (This is true. The budget-price plate had originally been hammered in flat to the ground, but the material had torn with use, and now one corner protruded and couldn't really be flattened.) So the change of mind on the part of the runner resulted not from a belief that he would be put out at the plate, but from his remembering that the plate was unsafe. (Why the runner, with the faulty plate in mind, couldn't have planned to slide or something, I don't know.) Many parties were named as being at least partly at fault, including the condo association, the league, and naturally, the umpire. Perhaps the company that manufactured the plate, too. If AT&T had a phone booth nearby, they might have to defend themselves as well. This happened several years ago. It's still in the courts. I remember that in another case, about 30 years ago, one local softball player sued another after being hit with a thrown bat. I don't know the details, or even whether the bat was thrown accidentally or in anger. But I do remember that the two were friends and continued to be friends throughout the lawsuit. I think the friend who threw the bat was not at financial risk, since somebody's insurance was going to cover the damages one way or the other.
__________________
greymule More whiskey—and fresh horses for my men! Roll Tide!
|
|
Wed Aug 13, 2003, 10:50am
|
|||
|
|||
|
We had a case here a little over 20 years ago. Player came in hard to the catcher and was warned not to do it again. Later in the game play at the play and the same guy thinks he's in the majors and crashes into the catcher. Catcher is still confined to a wheel chair.
Catcher's lawyer used the shotgun approach to litigation sue everyone, park, park board, both umps (for not ejecting him the first time), UIC (for improperly training the umpires on when to eject), park rep at the site, the jackass who's life depended on the game and maybe more, I don't know. I know that the blues were cleared as well as the UIC but I don't know if anyone did pay off. Needless to say we're still touchy about torso to torso contact around here.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
