14$ million lawsuit against... metal baseball bat companies?

brianmanahan

Lifer
Sep 2, 2006
24,229
5,627
136
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/14-5m-boys-brain-injury-161747443--spt.html

since their kid got involved in a baseball accident, lets sue the bat company for making metal bats! and while were at it, lets sue the whole freakin little league organization! for 15$ million!

its sad and all, but come on, you are playing baseball. there is an inherint risk in any physical sport. bad things happen. you dont have to juice the system if they do.
 

KB

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 1999
5,396
383
126
There is risk in everything. If you fall in the tub during a shower do you sue the tub company? Well in America you should, since they are likely to settle for millions. Easy money.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
85
91
This is on my son's bat:

bat_warning.jpg


This type of injury is very rare though. the ball has to hit your chest just at the right millisecond in order for it to affect your heart. At any rate, when my son pitches he will wear a chest protector.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Why should we expect anything else.... When you have a culture of liberalism where nobody is ever accountable for their own actions and there is always someone else (or "society") to blame, it makes complete sense to sue any and everybody whenever something goes wrong.
 

SearchMaster

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2002
7,792
114
106
This particular incident (from 2006), along with a few similar incidents, is what triggered a change in the bat rules and today's metal bats basically have the same "trampoline" effect as wooden bats. The changes have obviously been effective; as I recall, home runs in college baseball (the highest level where metal bats are still used) dropped by about 50% the first year after the change.

At the time, bat manufacturers were in an arms race to make the most powerful bats they could. In the 12-14 year old range, kids are still pitching from a shorter distance than 60'6" but the power generated from these bats was so high that pitchers were in a lot of danger.

Having said that, I don't agree with the lawsuit because assumption of risk is an important concept in all facets of life. My kids play baseball, one of them pitches, and I'm glad they have changed the bat rules for the kids' safety.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,145
10
81
This particular incident (from 2006), along with a few similar incidents, is what triggered a change in the bat rules and today's metal bats basically have the same "trampoline" effect as wooden bats. The changes have obviously been effective; as I recall, home runs in college baseball (the highest level where metal bats are still used) dropped by about 50% the first year after the change.

At the time, bat manufacturers were in an arms race to make the most powerful bats they could. In the 12-14 year old range, kids are still pitching from a shorter distance than 60'6" but the power generated from these bats was so high that pitchers were in a lot of danger.

Having said that, I don't agree with the lawsuit because assumption of risk is an important concept in all facets of life. My kids play baseball, one of them pitches, and I'm glad they have changed the bat rules for the kids' safety.

my nephew plays baseball all year (my sister pushes him on it hard. personal batting and pitching coach and goes to indoor place year around its insane). the speed the ball is comeing back is amazing.

i agree with the lawsuit. i do think the 14 million amount is insane.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
85
91
This particular incident (from 2006), along with a few similar incidents, is what triggered a change in the bat rules and today's metal bats basically have the same "trampoline" effect as wooden bats. The changes have obviously been effective; as I recall, home runs in college baseball (the highest level where metal bats are still used) dropped by about 50% the first year after the change.

At the time, bat manufacturers were in an arms race to make the most powerful bats they could. In the 12-14 year old range, kids are still pitching from a shorter distance than 60'6" but the power generated from these bats was so high that pitchers were in a lot of danger.

There is a complete composite ban for older kids now... all their bats must be BBCOR certified. And you are right, both college and high school teams have seen a dramatic decrease in the number of home runs this past year.

Younger leagues that use big barrel bats have banned all bats prior to 2012 models. The older composite bats would exceed their power rating by quite a bit after being broken in. The smaller 2 1/4" barrel composites can still be used to 2013, but after that they will all have to have the new bpf rating stamps.

Even 8 years olds can do some damage with these things. When coaching third base I should have let my son hit me in the head with the ball instead of ducking.... I could have been retired.
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,775
0
76
Why should we expect anything else.... When you have a culture of liberalism where nobody is ever accountable for their own actions and there is always someone else (or "society") to blame, it makes complete sense to sue any and everybody whenever something goes wrong.

This is more of a testimony to the massive failure of our legal system in enabling this type of behavior after the fact, and in making literally everything illegal in America:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38KFRBYaRTw





Watch that^^^^very interesting.
 
Last edited:

diesbudt

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2012
3,393
0
0
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/14-5m-boys-brain-injury-161747443--spt.html

since their kid got involved in a baseball accident, lets sue the bat company for making metal bats! and while were at it, lets sue the whole freakin little league organization! for 15$ million!

its sad and all, but come on, you are playing baseball. there is an inherint risk in any physical sport. bad things happen. you dont have to juice the system if they do.


"Always sue the person with the largest pockets" Rule (1) in filing a lawsuit.

However, that isnt the saddest one:

- In the early 2000s a surfer sued another surfer for $12,000 in damages for stealing his wave. (Judge laughed at it and threw the case out)

- In the late 90s a prisoner sued himself for $5million dollars, because he caused himself to have his rights and freedom taken away. But because he didn't have this money, he asked the state to pay for him if he should lose/win the case.

- A women around age 34 was shopping in a furniture store. As she was walking down an aisle a kid came running out of no where and tripped her. She bruised her knee. She sued the store for $35000 in damages for not having a place for kids to be looked at or a reminder for parents to keep an eye on their kid. (She won) [The kicker ... That was her own kid]

- A women picked up a 6-bottle of beer pack in a store. She walked a few feet, and accidently droped the bottles. They fell and broke. As she turned around to pick up another she slipped and fell on the fallen beer. She sued the store for $14000 for not having a spill sign on the ground near the spill. (She won)

- A man sued his neighbor for having a stray dog come from his yard and attack him, forcing him to have rabbi shots in case the dog was rabid as it was never captured. (Don't know amount or outcome.)



WELCOME TO AMERICA THE LAND OF THE LAWSUITS.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
There is a much longer thread in ATOT about this case, in which there is discussion that some manufacturers, including this one, were making bats that were "hotter" than what was legally permitted by the certification requirements then in existence, marketing them that way, and charging a huge premium for them. I don't pretend to have firsthand knowledge or expertise on this, but if this was the case with this bat, as it apparently was, they were knowingly making a product that was unnecessarily dangerous and likely to cause serious injury.

As for the amount of damages, you have to factor in that this kid will likely need full-time care for the rest of his life. After the lawyers are paid this family will net less than $10M, and it's likely they will need all of it to take care of him.

Overall I don't see this as any kind of windfall, nor am I outraged by this outcome.
 

diesbudt

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2012
3,393
0
0
There is a much longer thread in ATOT about this case, in which there is discussion that some manufacturers, including this one, were making bats that were "hotter" than what was legally permitted by the certification requirements then in existence, marketing them that way, and charging a huge premium for them. I don't pretend to have firsthand knowledge or expertise on this, but if this was the case with this bat, as it apparently was, they were knowingly making a product that was unnecessarily dangerous and likely to cause serious injury.

As for the amount of damages, you have to factor in that this kid will likely need full-time care for the rest of his life. After the lawyers are paid this family will net less than $10M, and it's likely they will need all of it to take care of him.

Overall I don't see this as any kind of windfall, nor am I outraged by this outcome.

Same, except you can fall 10feet and do the same brain damage that the ball did hitting the chest, it can happen in many many ways. It is a possibility in most sports to have a tramatic injury. Really sucks that it happens, but can't really blame any certain thing other than the sport itself.

"But he never made it that far. The ball had struck his chest at the precise millisecond between heartbeats, sending him into cardiac arrest, according to his doctors. He crumpled to the ground and stopped breathing."

Wow... that is insanely unlucky. And hitting the exact spot, at the exact time, with enough force? Geez almost sounds like a Martial arts master attack with his fists.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
There is a much longer thread in ATOT about this case, in which there is discussion that some manufacturers, including this one, were making bats that were "hotter" than what was legally permitted by the certification requirements then in existence, marketing them that way, and charging a huge premium for them. I don't pretend to have firsthand knowledge or expertise on this, but if this was the case with this bat, as it apparently was, they were knowingly making a product that was unnecessarily dangerous and likely to cause serious injury.

As for the amount of damages, you have to factor in that this kid will likely need full-time care for the rest of his life. After the lawyers are paid this family will net less than $10M, and it's likely they will need all of it to take care of him.

Overall I don't see this as any kind of windfall, nor am I outraged by this outcome.

You're a lawyer.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
66
91
You're a lawyer.

Yes, I am. I am mostly a defense lawyer in civil litigation matters. I am not a personal injury lawyer and have only handled a handful of plaintiff's personal injury cases. The mere fact that I belong to the legal profession does not make me inclined to support plaintiffs in such matters. If anything I trend toward the defense view of most civil litigation.
 

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,956
1
81
There is a much longer thread in ATOT about this case, in which there is discussion that some manufacturers, including this one, were making bats that were "hotter" than what was legally permitted by the certification requirements then in existence, marketing them that way, and charging a huge premium for them. I don't pretend to have firsthand knowledge or expertise on this, but if this was the case with this bat, as it apparently was, they were knowingly making a product that was unnecessarily dangerous and likely to cause serious injury.

From what I've read on this case, I agree. If the manufacturers had agreed to participate in a testing and certification system that was put in place explicitly for safety reasons, and were knowingly gaming the system, they should be liable.

As for the amount of damages, you have to factor in that this kid will likely need full-time care for the rest of his life. After the lawyers are paid this family will net less than $10M, and it's likely they will need all of it to take care of him.


Also agreed. I live near the town this took place in, which is a very high COL area. The settlement seems comparable to other settlements / awards that I've seen for people that will require lifetime medical care. One could question whether it makes sense as a society to spend this kind of money to keep someone alive in this state, but that is outside the scope of this case.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
How many people actually believe this lawsuit wouldn't happen if it was a wooden bat?:rolleyes: