Jury Idiocy Comes to Montana

[MTR]

http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/article_092384f6-c3eb-11de-8110-001cc4c03286.html

[DunninLA]

discussion here: http://robocoach.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=3767568

[MTR]

HILLERICH & BRADSBY CO. STATEMENT REGARDING MONTANA VERDICT IN ALUMINUM BAT CASE

This was an emotional case and we believe the jury responded to that and issued an emotional verdict.

Our company did nothing wrong. We made a bat in accordance with the rules. That bat was approved for play by baseball’s organizing and governing organizations. In fact, the jury found in our favor, that the bat was not defective.

However, the verdict that our company “failed to adequately warn of the dangers of the bat” has left us puzzled. It seems contradictory for the jury to say the bat is not defective but our company failed to warn that it could be dangerous. It appears to be an indictment of the entire sport of baseball. Anyone who has ever played the game, or any sport for that matter, understands there are risks inherent in baseball and the object is to use a bat, whether wood or aluminum, to hit the ball hard. Unfortunately, this verdict seems to be a statement on the society we live in today, that everything must have a warning label.

We sympathize with the Patch family over their loss, as we have since we first learned of this terrible accident. But we still believe this was an accident on a baseball field. Perhaps this will give the Patch family some closure. We hope that it does.



Rick Redman

VP Corporate Communications

[THE MAD-DOG99]

How lucky for that family that they got the same jury that awarded that lady tons of $$$

because McDonalds failed to put a notice that their coffee is hot..!!!

[tcannizzo]

Worse than the jury, I think it is disgusting that the family pursued money.
How they can possibly enjoy the money.
Every dollar they spend is a pathetic insult to the memory of their tragic loss.

Who are they going to go after next?
the batter that hit the ball?
the ball manufacturer?
the coaches?
the umpires?

[DonnieS]

Worse than the jury, I think it is disgusting that the family pursued money.
How they can possibly enjoy the money.
Every dollar they spend is a pathetic insult to the memory of their tragic loss.

Who are they going to go after next?
the batter that hit the ball?
the ball manufacturer?
the coaches?
the umpires?

Oh, you forgot, "its not about the money". Havent we heard that a million times.

[ATD]

This is really strange. I would want to see what the instructions the Judge had to the jury with regards to how Montana law is interpreted and why there was no mention with assumed risk to players for playing in any sport. It seems to me the simple question of "Did your son the pitcher review the bat for possible warnings before throwing?. "Did he ever review a batters bat before throwing for safety purposes?". "What? He NEVER checked??? EVER EVER ? Clearly your son was was negligent for not ensuring his own safety while throwing to batters." There's all kinds of things I would've implied to get this case beat into the ground.

The lawyers for Louisville sucked.

[Skarp]

How lucky for that family that they got the same jury that awarded that lady tons of $$$

because McDonalds failed to put a notice that their coffee is hot..!!!

The McDonald's case, despite being the poster child for over-litigiousness and runaway juries, was actually correctly decided.

McDonald's served its coffee at extremely hot temperatures, and it did so to reduce the number of refills that would be requested. Most people would leave the store before finishing (or even beginning) a single cup. McDonald's knew that people were being seriously burned by their coffee, but elected to continue to serve it excessively hot in order to increase profits. To compensate, they used lids that were very difficult to take off. The problem was that, when you did try to take the lid off (like the lady did in order to add cream), the cup would jerk violently, causing spills. The woman had no reason to expect that the coffee would be THAT hot, or that taking the lid off would lead to serious spillage.

It was not necessary for McDonald's to serve its coffee that hot. The decision was purely profit driven, and had nothing to do with the marketability of the product. As such, this is precisely the type of case for which punitive damages were conceived. When a company knowingly creates a dangerous situation in order to make extra money, a jury may take that money away (and then some) to discourage other businesses from making the same type of calculated decision.

[texas_snowman]

This is really strange. I would want to see what the instructions the Judge had to the jury with regards to how Montana law is interpreted and why there was no mention with assumed risk to players for playing in any sport. It seems to me the simple question of "Did your son the pitcher review the bat for possible warnings before throwing?. "Did he ever review a batters bat before throwing for safety purposes?". "What? He NEVER checked??? EVER EVER ? Clearly your son was was negligent for not ensuring his own safety while throwing to batters." There's all kinds of things I would've implied to get this case beat into the ground.

The lawyers for Louisville sucked.

I'm certainly no lawyer, but I've watched enough TV to understand that the Louisville attorneys were probably correct in refraining from placing any blame on the boy... It wouldn't have changed the verdict and most probably would have increased the awarded monetary damages by pissing off some members of the already emotionally charged jury.
It's not right and it's not fair, but in our society, it's gotta' be somebody's fault...and it's usually gonna' be George Bush or the one with the most moola.

[Surehitter]

This is not good The next thing you know someone will get hurt playing softball / fastpitch and go after the ball manufatures for softballs not being soft and the balls not having a warning printed on them that the ball is not soft and could cause serious injury.