If Anybody's Intereted in Lawsuits

[ceejtank]

The bat company shouldn't be forced to pay anything, and at this time they werent. The plaintiff would have lost this suit. You make a product, if someone uses it, and something bad happens - you won't be held at fault unless it the issue happened because of something your company did.

In this instance the bat was used properly and showed no defects. They should have sued the league for letting metal bats be used.

That being said, I think the CEO of the company "settled" to be nice to be honest. Which is why he isn't worried about precedent. Also - since this was settled, and wasn't a court ruling "precedent" cannot be set. It was a voluntary action.

 

[mjhoward]

While I'm sorry that the boy suffered a brain injury... that lawsuit is ridiculous. If this sets precedence, then I think I'll sue the manufacturer of my coffee cup because the coffee pot brewed the water too hot.

The lawsuit is not at all ridiculous.

So you agree that the manufacturer of a Baseball Bat is responsible for what happened rather than it being a freak accident with nobody at fault?

 

[usayit]

If all of that cost them 14.5M then the healthcare system in the US is worse than I thought...

Average life expectancy in the US is 78. Kid was 12 when he was injured. He will require constant care for approximately 66 years and will be incapable of earning an income and zero health insurance. Throw in inflation. They will not be living the good life. As I eluded earlier, if you are not willing to trade positions with that kid you should seriously reconsider your stance.



Once again....

* No one knows the details of the settlement
* It was a settlement. No fault or liability was claimed.
* No legal precedence was set
* CEO claims this is a rare event and felt a precedence for future liability by his company has been set
* More than likely the family would have lost. CEO decided to be nice and settle (which is their right)
* This isn't a paper cut or some minor injury. This was a serious injury.

No one here claims that frivolous lawsuits are not a problem... What is in question is whether or not ~this~ lawsuit is a representative of that problem.

 

[MLeeK]

If all of that cost them 14.5M then the healthcare system in the US is worse than I thought...

Average life expectancy in the US is 78. Kid was 12 when he was injured. He will require constant care for approximately 66 years and will be incapable of earning an income and zero health insurance. Throw in inflation. They will not be living the good life.

14.5M is maybe 20 years of care if they are careful. Unfortunately he will eventually probably have to be institutionalized and that will eat up the remainder REAL QUICK. If that lasts 20 years I'd be impressed.

 

[rexbobcat]

Average life expectancy in the US is 78. Kid was 12 when he was injured. He will require constant care for approximately 66 years and will be incapable of earning an income and zero health insurance. Throw in inflation. They will not be living the good life.

So let's blame it on an outside entity? I'm not saying its not sad.

But since it was an accident not unusual to getting freakin pelted in the chest by a line drive ball, somebody's got to pay, right?

Maybe if it was a baby carriage and it exploded, sure. But it was an already potentially dangerous tool and they're angry because...somebody got hurt?

I have two friends who work 9-5 50k a year jobs and they have a stay at home son who has been mentally handicapped since birth. He's 25 now.

It's not something that will totally destroy a family if they don't let it. :/

 

[usayit]

Average life expectancy in the US is 78. Kid was 12 when he was injured. He will require constant care for approximately 66 years and will be incapable of earning an income and zero health insurance. Throw in inflation. They will not be living the good life.

So let's blame it on an outside entity? I'm not saying its not sad.

But since it was an accident not unusual to getting freakin pelted in the chest by a line drive ball, somebody's got to pay, right?

Maybe if it was a baby carriage and it exploded, sure. But it was an already potentially dangerous tool and they're angry because...somebody got hurt?

Try again.. no blame was admitted or accepted in this situation. No one was forced to pay. I'm not arguing that frivolous lawsuits don't exist..and are unjust... just this one you picked is not one of them. You can't seem to get that through your head.

History? maybe start by reading the contents of this thread first. For starters, the lawsuit never ended in a judge's verdict... it ended with a settlement.

 

[rexbobcat]

Try again.. no blame was admitted or accepted in this situation. No one was forced to pay.

History? maybe start by reading the contents of this thread first.

What is a lawsuit if not blame? You did this to my son. I think you should pay. Try again...

I'm just going by what the article said. The way they put it makes it seem petty.

I don't know what you're referring to.

 

[rexbobcat]

I do feel sorry for the company. They certainly didn't set out to injure anyone.

The post I was referring to was the OPs in which he unequivocally stated that he doesn't care what happens to random people he doesn't know.

I don't understand why that's deplorable. And please don't say "what's wrong with you?" just explain to me why you think it's deplorable.

 

[usayit]

Good lord you need to read more...

Look up the legal definition of lawsuit...

Look up the legal definition of settlement...


Blame is irrelevant... no blame was assigned... only liability matters of which the judge never gave his final word.




PS> JAC526 used "deplorable"... I personally would have chosen "extreme lack of empathy".... I'm not sure which is better... my terminology is used to describe a condition in DSM 4. So maybe that's too strong.

 

[rexbobcat]

Good lord you need to read more...

Look up the legal definition of lawsuit...

Look up the legal definition of settlement...

Blame is irrelevant... no blame was assigned... only liability matters of which the judge never gave his final word.

Good lord, I'm not going off of the settlement, or what the f ever.

I'm going off the fact that they sued in the first place. Just because the blame wasn't "legally" given doesn't mean that it's not there.

*Gets ready for one-up starting with the words "Jesus Christ!"*

 

[mjhoward]

Good lord you need to read more...

Look up the legal definition of lawsuit...

Look up the legal definition of settlement...


Blame is irrelevant... no blame was assigned... only liability matters of which the judge never gave his final word.




PS> JAC526 used "deplorable"... I personally would have chosen "extreme lack of empathy".... I'm not sure which is better... my terminology is used to describe a condition in DSM 4. So maybe that's too strong.

Regardless of semantics, an innocent manufacturer is out 14.5M over a freak accident in which they were uninvolved in. Not only that, but the parents sued the friggin store that sold the bat, whom also had zero involvement in the freak accident. You may like that kind of precedent, but I sure dont

 

[IByte]

All I'm going to say thankfully Mrs. Irwim didn't sue the hotel, Animal Planet, camera crew, or the boatman because of Steve Irwins(RIP) freak accident. Reason over emotion rules...goodnight all

 

[unpopular]

You never hear about the second degree burns which the woman who successfully sued McDonalds suffered, or their statement about excessively hot coffee as more or less: we keep our coffee undrinkably hot because people don't drink it at their destination and we want it to stay hot for when they arrive. The medias BS-O-METER wasn't there to report that one, only that what an outrage it was that this woman would sue over hot coffee - which severally burned her in a way that required hospitalization.

Often times the media spins these kinds of stories all out of proportion and in weird ways.

Was the bat manufactured in a way that made it unusually dangerous?
Was the cage properly maintained and erected, and did this have any effect on the boy's injuries?
Were the players encouraged or permitted to throw the bat in a hazardous or unnecessary way?
Were adults responsible for the safety of the game supervising the players?
Was the bat properly maintained, was the grip in tact?

It's interesting to me, because we always assume that everything is always in order all the time, that under these kinds of circumstances that everything is typical and expected. I think when we hear about these kinds of things we don't want to think that negligence had actually occurred - otherwise in some way it puts us all at risk.

 

[rexbobcat]

You never hear about the second degree burns which the woman who successfully sued McDonalds suffered, or their statement about excessively hot coffee as more or less: we keep our coffee undrinkably hot because people don't drink it at their destination and we want it to stay hot for when they arrive. The medias BS-O-METER wasn't there to report that one, only that what an outrage it was that this woman would sue over hot coffee - which severally burned her in a way that required hospitalization.

Often times the media spins these kinds of stories all out of proportion and in weird ways.

Was the bat manufactured in a way that made it unusually dangerous?
Was the cage properly maintained and erected, and did this have any effect on the boy's injuries?
Were the players encouraged to throw the bat in a hazardous way?
Were adults responsible for the safety of the game supervising the players?
Was the bat properly maintained, was the grip in tact?

That's the only way I could see justification in this lawsuit. If the bat had some kind of anomaly during manufacturing that made it more dangerous...Yes...I can understand that.

But if the lawsuit is because "metal bats make things go faster than wooden bats" then, no...just...no...

But if it's the latter, I wonder they're going to have to puts warning on their products about safety.

It would be really messed up if this was like the case where a guy sued a small lawnmower company into oblivion because he picked the mower up to chop hedges (???) and got his fingers cut off. But since there was no label that says not to do that, he won the case. At least that's how I think it went. Let us protect people from themselves. Lol

 

[unpopular]

I never EVER trust mass media when it comes to civil lawsuits.

Frankly, this is a HUGE settlement, and I really don't think that they would have settled unless the lawsuit had some standing.