PDA

View Full Version : New Jersey woman suing Little League player



Roughneck93
06-22-2012, 04:02 PM
Wow...

MANCHESTER TOWNSHIP, N.J. (AP) — A New Jersey woman who was struck in the face with a baseball at a Little League game is suing the young catcher who threw it.
Elizabeth Lloyd (http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=) is seeking more than $150,000 in damages to cover medical costs stemming from the incident at a Manchester Little League (http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=) game two years ago. She's also seeking an undefined amount for pain and suffering.
Lloyd was sitting at a picnic table near a fenced-in bullpen when she was hit with the ball.
Catcher Matthew Migliaccio (http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=) was 11 years old at the time and was warming up a pitcher.
The lawsuit filed April 24 alleges Migliaccio's errant throw was intentional and reckless, "assaulted and battered" Lloyd and caused "severe, painful and permanent" injuries.
A second count alleges Migliaccio's actions were negligent and careless through "engaging in inappropriate physical and/or sporting activity" near Lloyd. She continues to suffer pain and anguish, incur medical expenses and has been unable to carry out her usual duties and activities, the lawsuit says.
And Lloyd's husband, in a third count, is suing for the loss of "services, society and consortium" of his wife. They've demanded a jury trial.
Anthony Pagano (http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=), a lawyer for the Migliaccios, said the lawsuit is frivolous and without merit.
"I just think that it's disgusting that you have people suing an 11-year-old kid for overthrowing his pitcher in the bullpen," Pagano said. "It's horrible this can actually happen and get this far. Ultimately, hopefully, justice will prevail."
The count alleging negligence and carelessness is covered by homeowner's insurance, Pagano said, but the other counts are not. Little League has denied any coverage.
Lloyd's lawyer was out of the office Friday and could not be reached for comment.
Steve Barr (http://www.chron.com/?controllerName=search&action=search&channel=news&search=1&inlineLink=1&query=), a spokesman for Little League, declined to comment on the litigation. He said each local league is required to have accident insurance, but that only covers personnel.
"That includes coaches, players, even concession stand workers. But it does not cover spectators," Barr said.
Matthew's father, Bob Migliaccio, said they were concerned for Lloyd when it happened. Then his son started receiving threatening and nasty letters, he said, and he started getting angry.
"The whole thing has almost been surreal," Migliaccio said. "We keep thinking it's just going to go away, and then a week and a half ago a sheriff shows up at my door to serve my son the papers."
Migliaccio said if his son had been horsing around, he would feel differently. But Matthew was doing what his coaches told him to do, he said, and noted Little League players aren't always accurate in their throws.
"It's absurd to expect every 11-year-old to throw the ball on target," Migliaccio said. "Everyone knows you've got to watch out. You assume some risk when you go out to a field. That's just part of being at a game."
Migliaccio said he and his wife, Sue, would love to beat the charges in court, but it could cost them tens of thousands of dollars. They also don't want to put their son and other kids on the team through all the questions and depositions a trial would bring.
"It's to the point now where we just want it to be over," he said.
Matthew, described by his father as a "baseball junkie," still plays on three different teams. But Migliaccio and his wife have stepped down from coaching and managing the concession stand because of the suit.
Migliaccio said as angry as he is about the lawsuit, he's almost more angry with Little League. He said they've volunteered hundreds of hours over the years, and he believes Little League should assist in defending their son.
"Somebody else has to step in here and help us out," Migliaccio said. "I just feel people should know about this, and maybe Little League can figure out a way to protect these kids.

http://www.chron.com/news/article/NJ-woman-hit-with-ball-sues-Little-League-player-3654887.php

ccmom
06-22-2012, 04:34 PM
Give me a break :rolleyes:

ctown81
06-22-2012, 04:36 PM
As an insurance adjuster the lady has every right to sue the parents. She should not have to foot the bill for something that wasn't her fault. Serving the child is the only fault I see. Well I don't know about the child being reckless part either but other than that it's a valid claim. The parents should have insurance whether it's home or a renters policy that covers these type of lawsuits.

44INAROW
06-22-2012, 04:46 PM
As an insurance adjuster the lady has every right to sue the parents. She should not have to foot the bill for something that wasn't her fault. Serving the child is the only fault I see. Well I don't know about the child being reckless part either but other than that it's a valid claim. The parents should have insurance whether it's home or a renters policy that covers these type of lawsuits.

I am not going to get on my insurance agent soapbox here (MUCH lol) - but SOME of those losses would/might be covered under a standard homeowners or renters policy but not all of them. This is a terrible situation and too many facts are left out to make an intelligent decision but it looks like these folks are money hungry.. Claiming the boy was malicious is going way overboard. I hope it's thrown out.. She should have medical insurance to cover her expenses.. Maybe if they would have been reasonable, they could have worked out a deal for the boys parents pay her out of pocket expenses, etc. Like I said, way to many facts missing to form a definite opinion though..

bigwood33
06-22-2012, 05:03 PM
They want a jury trial, I am volunteering to serve.

ctown81
06-22-2012, 05:11 PM
I am not going to get on my insurance agent soapbox here (MUCH lol) - but SOME of those losses would/might be covered under a standard homeowners or renters policy but not all of them. This is a terrible situation and too many facts are left out to make an intelligent decision but it looks like these folks are money hungry.. Claiming the boy was malicious is going way overboard. I hope it's thrown out.. She should have medical insurance to cover her expenses.. Maybe if they would have been reasonable, they could have worked out a deal for the boys parents pay her out of pocket expenses, etc. Like I said, way to many facts missing to form a definite opinion though..

I agree the malicious comment was way overboard. Like you say many facts are missing and I don't even agree with the suit. I think she's seeing those dollar signs for the pain and suffering. I did say she's has every right to pursue but that doesn't mean I think it's right. Doubt if she wins though. She should have worked out a deal. Heck you're at a baseball park. She has a duty to watch out. What if a foul ball hit her. Wonder would she sue for that.

Phil C
06-22-2012, 09:33 PM
Was there a sign to watch out? I know at our baseball field there is one.

Tejastrue
06-22-2012, 09:44 PM
I agree the malicious comment was way overboard. Like you say many facts are missing and I don't even agree with the suit. I think she's seeing those dollar signs for the pain and suffering. I did say she's has every right to pursue but that doesn't mean I think it's right. Doubt if she wins though. She should have worked out a deal. Heck you're at a baseball park. She has a duty to watch out. What if a foul ball hit her. Wonder would she sue for that.

Is this called CYA. LOL. I think it is called being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Nothing more. Appreciate your comments 44.

Tejastrue
06-22-2012, 09:51 PM
Was there a sign to watch out? I know at our baseball field there is one.

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4794773231043615&id=314b50d5f99a61b2fc2104ea8aed37fb

regaleagle
06-23-2012, 02:32 AM
Just another example of the letigious society we all live in today. There's always gonna be a small minority of people that will abuse or take an unfair advantage of others in the name of justice and personal infringement of their rights. The cumulative effect is that the vast majority suffers at the expense of a very, very small minority that causes all of us to pay more than what we should. Of course, the insurance companies love this type of scenario. They are forever creating new coverages and verbages that will ensure(and insure) their continued enrichment for everyone's greater "protection". Thanks, but I'll take my chances.

coachc45
06-23-2012, 09:28 PM
As an insurance adjuster the lady has every right to sue the parents. She should not have to foot the bill for something that wasn't her fault. Serving the child is the only fault I see. Well I don't know about the child being reckless part either but other than that it's a valid claim. The parents should have insurance whether it's home or a renters policy that covers these type of lawsuits.

You are kidding right?!?!?!?
this is possibly the dumbest lawsuit in history. Sue a kid for an overthrow. Shoot, sue the stupid Bitty for sitting behind the bullpen!

MGAR
06-24-2012, 02:01 PM
You are kidding right?!?!?!?
this is possibly the dumbest lawsuit in history. Sue a kid for an overthrow. Shoot, sue the stupid Bitty for sitting behind the bullpen!

While we are at it, let's sue the league for putting picnic table near the bullpen.

Hmm... Sue the company that made the baseball that was thrown.... for something...

This is dumb.

ctown81
06-25-2012, 11:36 AM
You are kidding right?!?!?!?
this is possibly the dumbest lawsuit in history. Sue a kid for an overthrow. Shoot, sue the stupid Bitty for sitting behind the bullpen!

Am I kidding about the parents are legally liable and it would be covered by their home insurance. No I'm kidding. Happens ALL the time. It rarely goes to suit though.

You have every right to do just about anything you want to that doesn't infringe on my rights. Just because I say she has the right doesn't mean I'm condoning or would do the same.

coachc45
06-25-2012, 03:46 PM
Am I kidding about the parents are legally liable and it would be covered by their home insurance. No I'm kidding. Happens ALL the time. It rarely goes to suit though.

You have every right to do just about anything you want to that doesn't infringe on my rights. Just because I say she has the right doesn't mean I'm condoning or would do the same.

Sure sounded like you were. Sure she has the right.....but why would a sane person do it. Probably because he insurance adjuster told her she needed to because they wouldn't pay....but that brings me to a WHOLE other RANT!

MGAR
06-25-2012, 04:27 PM
Ohhhhhhh and sue the coach from warming up a pitcher......

ctown81
06-25-2012, 05:23 PM
Sure sounded like you were. Sure she has the right.....Probably because he insurance adjuster told her she needed to because they wouldn't pay....but that brings me to a WHOLE other RANT!

Suit is going a steptoo far but that's what we have insurance for. For crazy stuff like this. I'm assuming your last comment was a knock on adjusters being bad people. Let me guess, we get paid more for denying claims right?

AP Panther Fan
06-25-2012, 05:52 PM
I must be missing something here....aren't most Little League Fields owned by the City in which they are located? Doesn't the City have some sort of umbrella liability coverage for accidents that occur on their property?

I think the lawsuit is ridiculous, but more ridiculous is that the kid and/or kid's parents are the ones being sued.

ctown81
06-25-2012, 06:13 PM
I must be missing something here....aren't most Little League Fields owned by the City in which they are located? Doesn't the City have some sort of umbrella liability coverage for accidents that occur on their property?

I think the lawsuit is ridiculous, but more ridiculous is that the kid and/or kid's parents are the ones being sued.

They more than likely do but if suit is involved the attorneys will attempt to go after everyone involve. I doubt the City's insurance would want to foot the bill 100%

coachc45
06-25-2012, 07:05 PM
Suit is going a steptoo far but that's what we have insurance for. For crazy stuff like this. I'm assuming your last comment was a knock on adjusters being bad people. Let me guess, we get paid more for denying claims right?

No...thats not it. I know that they don't. But the insurance company doesn't make money if it is constantly paying out for claims. I have insurance on myself to cover accidents like this one. I think it is utterly ridiculous to sue in a case like this. It is typical of an Insurance adjuster to say things like, "she shouldn't have to fit the bill for this alone"... Well if she has "health Insurance" then she has already fit the bill for it.

ctown81
06-25-2012, 07:24 PM
No...thats not it. I know that they don't. But the insurance company doesn't make money if it is constantly paying out for claims. I have insurance on myself to cover accidents like this one. I think it is utterly ridiculous to sue in a case like this. It is typical of an Insurance adjuster to say things like, "she shouldn't have to fit the bill for this alone"... Well if she has "health Insurance" then she has already fit the bill for it.

So I take it you know a lot of adjusters to make that comment? Like I said I don't agree with it and I wouldn't sue but if you're liable you're liable. I'm not trying to be a jerk just stating what rights she has. Doubt if she has health insurance, if she does it's very odd she will try to sue. If she does have it and they take care of her, if health insurance is anything like auto, they will more than likely try to collect from her home insurance. I'm not too keen on health insurance. Well sadly enough, the family's home insurance company will have to get involved with the suit and although the family's insurance company can possibly win, they will prob settle out of court to keep away from the cost of trial.

coachc45
06-25-2012, 07:30 PM
So I take it you know a lot of adjusters to make that comment? Like I said I don't agree with it and I wouldn't sue but if you're liable you're liable. I'm not trying to be a jerk just stating what rights she has. Doubt if she has health insurance, if she does it's very odd she will try to sue. If she does have it and they take care of her, if health insurance is anything like auto, they will more than likely try to collect from her home insurance. I'm not too keen on health insurance. Well sadly enough, the family's home insurance company will have to get involved with the suit and although the family's insurance company can possibly win, they will prob settle out of court to keep away from the cost of trial.

I do. I guess I am just bitter about the whole insurance racket. When my wife and kids were hit by the drunk driver.... It pissed me off that we had to sue the DD's insurance so that they would pay the hospital bills. You'd think that situation would be one where they would write the check? Oh no, my wife got to answer questions like "How far away were you when you recognized that the car coming toward you was swearving into your lane? Why did you not take evasive action?" Thanks Insurance Adjuster man.

ctown81
06-25-2012, 07:37 PM
I do. I guess I am just bitter about the whole insurance racket. When my wife and kids were hit by the drunk driver.... It pissed me off that we had to sue the DD's insurance so that they would pay the hospital bills. You'd think that situation would be one where they would write the check? Oh no, my wife got to answer questions like "How far away were you when you recognized that the car coming toward you was swearving into your lane? Why did you not take evasive action?" Thanks Insurance Adjuster man.

Sorry to hear that. In your case the adjuster should have been trying to figure out how much to make the check for. The questions they asked are mandatory but after the statement is done they should have been asking for medical bills and asking where to pick the car up at? No you definitely have good reason to think the way you do.