Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: PapaBear3625

Courts have consistently found that attending a baseball game constitutes an assumption of risk since balls (and bats) coming into the stands are an expected part of the game.


21 posted on 05/28/2014 6:55:36 PM PDT by muir_redwoods (When I first read it, " Atlas Shrugged" was fiction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: muir_redwoods

The back of every MLB baseball ticket should have the following disclaimer: “THE HOLDER ASSUMES ALL RISK AND DANGERS INCIDENTAL TO THE GAME OF BASEBALL INCLUDING SPECIFICALLY (BUT NOT EXCLUSIVELY) THE DANGER OF BEING INJURED BY THROWN OR BATTED BALLS.”


22 posted on 05/28/2014 7:17:06 PM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: muir_redwoods

Interesting. The team owners don’t want to be liable.

I know someone who took a boy scout troop to a hockey game. She got hit in the face with a hockey puck. Not one person from the hockey team came to help her to try to get the scouts home. They didn’t want to show that they had any liability. She had to get the scouts home and went to the hospital to get medical care. She needed a lot of surgery and dental care.


26 posted on 05/28/2014 7:25:32 PM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: muir_redwoods

The seminal case was Ingersoll v. Onondaga Hockey Club in 1938. I still remember that one from my Torts class in 1981.


28 posted on 05/28/2014 8:27:19 PM PDT by henkster (Do I really need a sarcasm tag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson