Louisville Slugger sued for failing to warn that bats are dangerous!!!

Indiana Mike · #1 10-29-2009, 05:20 AM

I sadly can believe this .

Just watched this on the news channel and the MOM says it is not about the money but to make the manufacturer warn about the dangers of bats. So MOM, how about not taking the money and settle for them putting on T.V. commercials , school programs , literature and warning labels instead?

Yes , their loss is saddening and I hope I never have to bury one of my children. I put the death aside when commenting on this.

Hmmm... I got a fender telecaster headstock to the face once , made me bleed and it hurt really bad . I didn't know that guitars would hurt if you received a blow from one and that a guitarist flailing wildly needs ample room .

Maybe I should sue Fender?

Quote:

HELENA, Mont. (AP) -- A Montana jury has found the maker of Louisville Slugger baseball bats failed to adequately warn about the dangers the product can pose, awarding a family $850,000 for the 2003 death of their son in a baseball game.

The jury on Wednesday awarded a total of $850,000 in damages against Hillerich & Bradsby(Louisville Slugger) for failure to place warnings on their alumnium bats. However, the jury decided the product was not defective.

Brandon Patch's family argued that aluminum baseball bats are dangerous because they cause the ball to travel at a greater speed. They argued their 18-year-old son did not have enough time to react to the ball being struck before it hit him in the head while he was pitching in an American Legion baseball game in Helena in 2003.

Debbie Patch says she hopes the decision will make more people aware of the dangers associated with aluminum bats and that more youth leagues will switch to using wooden bats.

The attorneys for Hillerich & Bradsby declined to comment

**Eric Perry** · #2 10-29-2009, 05:51 AM

Yet another reminder of how completely and totally effed up the legal system is in this world. Sadly, it's not even surprising anymore.

SnoMan · #3 10-29-2009, 06:37 AM

Accountability and parenting.

It's like watching both become history before our eyes.

jeremyr · #4 10-29-2009, 07:20 AM

so let me get this right.

You let your kid play on a baseball team where you know that balls will be flying around like crazy and somehow you figure it's Louisville's issue because your son might have had an off game?

Don't get me wrong, I feel sorry for the family and all, but how do we know he just wasn't paying attention or let his guard down? This is what happens when you play sports. We all know there is a chance of SERIOUS injury while playing them.

Maybe the mother of the girl that died from hit in the head by the hockey puck should sue whoever makes the hockey sticks.

This is just deplorable.

**Eric Perry** · #5 10-29-2009, 07:26 AM

IMO, it's not about the parents suing (or the chick suing for burns when she spilled hot coffee on herself, etc.) it's the fact that the legal system ALLOWS such frivolous lawsuits in the first place.

Clark Dark · #6 10-29-2009, 07:51 AM

the young man was 18...high school age, probably a grad...in an American Legion game, where other men can hit a 100mph fast ball, line drives, part of the game...sounds like the jury had a pity party...I'm sure Loiusvilles attorneys will appeal

bmc · #7 10-29-2009, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Perry

Yet another reminder of how completely and totally effed up the legal system is in this world. Sadly, it's not even surprising anymore.

USA, not the world.

Sadly, product liability killed small aircraft manufacturing in the US back in the 80's over stupid, stupid cases. One of my favorites was of a drunk guy who jumped in his private airplane and dodged the airport manager who was driving his car in front of the plane, preventing him from flying. The guy took off, crashed and killed himself. His family successfully sued Piper aircraft, the manufacturer of the airplane.

Brilliant.

two fingers · #8 10-29-2009, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnoMan

Accountability and parenting.

It's like watching both become history before our eyes.

^^^^^^^^^^this^^^^^^^^^^

This, IMO, is the #1 problem facing this country today.

Stampy · #9 10-29-2009, 08:01 AM

I don't want to sound mean but getting hit by a line drive tough sh*t it happens. I was pitching in a game and got a line drive sent back to my face. It broke my nose and I got sent to the hospital but that was about it. Agreed on the effed up legal system.

**Eric Perry** · #10 10-29-2009, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmc

USA, not the world...

Sorry, my bad. I meant to put this country. Not sure where "world" came from.

shadowtippy · #11 10-29-2009, 08:33 AM

Why didn't they go after the manufacturer of the ball, too? It shouldn't have been produced from materials that would allow it to be hit more than 20 feet. That would have prevented his and other injuries. Bring the batter up on manslaughter charges, also. He, after all, was as responsible for the death as the bat.Our legal system sucks for allowing such suits to be presented, much less prosecuted.

Papazita · #12 10-29-2009, 08:47 AM

I also think the batter needs to be sued for not only hitting the ball that killed their son (which is a shame), but for even swinging the bat in the first place. I mean, why would he do that? Doesn't he know how dangerous that is?

Heck, why not sue Abner Doubleday (yeah yeah...did he invent it or not...) for putting the pitcher's mound in front of the guy swinging the big club at the hard ball?

And what about the batter? He hit a ball that killed someone. Imagine the emotional distress he must be going through. I think he is entitled to something from the deceased's family for his pain and trauma. I mean, what was that kid thinking, throwing a hard ball at a guy holding a bat?

Lawsuits for everybody!

Mark Latimour · #13 10-29-2009, 08:50 AM

I wonder if there is more to this story than we are being told.

nortonrider · #14 10-29-2009, 08:57 AM

Long after the fall of America, the historians will be talking about how it was crap like this that done us in.

on a side note:
I wonder if I can sue Indiana Mike for posting this topic and raising my blood pressure so early in the morning?

MakiSupaStar · #15 10-29-2009, 09:04 AM

Wow. I better put my Louisville slugger away. I had it laying by my bed in case I needed to wash an intruder's hair with wood shampoo. Glad I know now. I guess, I'll have to rely on these old numchucks I have laying around. The warning label is hidden underneath a dried up chunk of brain so I'm covered if I need to sue later.

burk48237 · #16 10-29-2009, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

I wonder if there is more to this story than we are being told.

I doubt it Mark, while people love to complain that these are "freak cases", the fact of the matter is, the legal standards to punish someone or their lawyer for bringing a junk lawsuit are very high in the US. And for most companies, the only option is to settle out of court, put a label on the product and charge more for it. That's what you get when the only people you put in office to control the Lawyers is other Lawyers. Our manufacturing and employment base shrink, and Lawyers buy more Porsches. The United States is the only modern legal system in the world that doesn't have "loser pays" on lawsuits. Instead we have "public pays".

Armueller2001 · #17 10-29-2009, 09:23 AM

These assault bats are slaughtering our nation's children.

billjr · #18 10-29-2009, 09:24 AM

I am usually very sceptical of product liability lawsuits, and don't know enough about his case to comment on it directly, however I will say that I am against the use of metal and composite bats for several reasons.

1) Their danger is real and known. The bats can be manufactured to produce much higher ball speeds than players can realistically react to. That is why leagues have limits on how much sball peed a bat can produce. These bats are being used at the younger levels of play, where the infields are smaller and reaction times are slower. This can be a very dangerous situation, one that can easily be made safer by the use of wooden bats.

2) They give players an unrealistic understanding of their abilities. I've read numerous articles about the sad fact that so many college players never make it to the big leagues because they can't adapt to hitting with a wooden bat. Homerun sluggers find out that the metal bats had much more to do with their greatness than their own abilities. Imagine putting velcrow on balls and gloves, and then bragging about being a golden glove defender.

3) Consistancy from start to finish. By using wooden bats all allong the way, our young players can develop a clear understanding of what it takes to be a major league player, and can develop those skills better with the use of the same type of equipment.

Again, I'm not defending the ruling in this case, but I do think that all of the evidence points to the fact that wooden bats are better for baseball at all levels. The use of wood only would give us a sport that demonstrates greatness through the players abilities rather than through the equipment's abilities.

Steve · #19 10-29-2009, 09:31 AM

Clearly the coach should have been made a party to the action for not properly advising or training the decedent.

Jim Nazium · #20 10-29-2009, 09:37 AM

"Debbie Patch says she hopes the decision will make more people aware of the dangers associated with aluminum bats and that more youth leagues will switch to using wooden bats."

This is hardly the dumbest aspect of this lawsuit, but I just want to point out that the reason little leagues all use aluminum bats is that wood bats can break and cause injury. Dodgers catcher Steve Yeager got hit in the throat by a chunk of a broken bat and nearly died.