Family wins lawsuit against Louisville Slugger....what's your take on this?

**kaorder1999** · 10-30-2009, 12:33 PM

Jury Awards $850,000 In Louisville Slugger Case

By Ben Jackey/WLKY

LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- A Montana jury took a swing at the makers of the Louisville Slugger baseball bat.

The panel ruled in favor of a family who sued the company for not warning users about the dangers of using aluminum bats.

The verdict means Hillerich and Bradsby is on the hook for $850,000. The company said it's not sure what it means beyond that because the jury also decided there was nothing wrong with the product.

“We think that most players understand the risk that they're taking when they step onto the field,” said Hillerich and Bradsby spokesman Rick Redman.

In 2003, 18-year-old Brandon Patch died after being hit in the head by a ball he threw to a batter. That batter was using an aluminum Louisville Slugger.

Patch family attorneys argued the manufacturer did not provide proper warning about the dangers of using aluminum bats.

A jury awarded the family a total of $850,000, including $750,000 in lost wages.

“We came into this not knowing. We were just hoping to prevail for Brandon. This is for Brandon and for the other kids on the field,” said his mother Deb Patch.

“I think we're all kind of wondering if this is even an indictment of the entire game of baseball,” said Redman.

Redman pointed to the fact that the jury did not find the product to be defective. He doesn't know if the company will now have to put special labels on metal bats, but he fears it could change sport as we know it.

“It's really a statement on the society that we live in today that we have to have a warning label on everything and that you just wonder if we're heading down that path more and more of being a nanny state,” said Redman.

Redman said Hillerich and Bradsby is considering whether to appeal the decision.

There is still an outstanding case in New Jersey against the company involving a teen paralyzed by a line drive that came off an aluminum Louisville Slugger.

**Maroon87** · 10-30-2009, 12:48 PM

I'm not a fan of aluminum bats but come on...the player and the family should be well aware of the inherent risks involved.

I just wonder why it is that everytime an accident like this happens someone has to get sued.

**STANG RED** · 10-30-2009, 12:55 PM

In the real world sometimes bad things happen to good people. Its just a part of life. The lawsuit was BS, and so was the verdict.

BaTmAn24 · 10-30-2009, 12:55 PM

This is flat out ridiculous. You are playing in a sport where a ball can travel over 100 mph and at any given moment can strike you and injure you. How on earth is it the bat's fault? If you can blame the bat then could you claim the hitter was the murder and the bat was his weapon?

rangerjoe33 · 10-30-2009, 01:01 PM

Yeah, at 18 years old you would think he knew the risks. Lost wages? For his parents or for him? Was he a potential draft choice/or a drafted player already with a contract? If so they certainly knew the risk, either way completely wrong decision by the system.

**NastySlot** · 10-30-2009, 01:03 PM

then sue the league, sue the coach, sue the ball maker and glove maker.

**coachc45** · 10-30-2009, 01:06 PM

They shouldn't sue Louisville slugger! They should sue the people who made the pitching rubber for not having a warning label that says if you stand on it you might get hit in the head with a baseball!!!

STUPID PEOPLE!!!!

**44INAROW** · 10-30-2009, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by BaTmAn24
This is flat out ridiculous. You are playing in a sport where a ball can travel over 100 mph and at any given moment can strike you and injure you. How on earth is it the bat's fault? If you can blame the bat then could you claim the hitter was the murder and the bat was his weapon?

I agree.........

**BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END** · 10-30-2009, 01:18 PM

It is apparent that many of you are clueless on the motives for litigation. This family only sued for $850,000 and $750,000 was accounted for in lost wages....The family wanted to change the policy itself and try to promote a safer playing environment for the players so that other families don't have to suffer the same grief and hardship that they endured by losing their son. If this were greed-based tort, then they would have asked for a lot more money.

Anyone ever seen the warning labels on helmets for football? Common sense tells everyone that there are inherent risks associated with playing the game, but the warning label is there to educate people and make sure everyone is well aware of that risk.

**jason** · 10-30-2009, 01:22 PM

how about these two options:

kid 1 throws ball towards player with bat, player hits ball that kid 1 threw and ball strikes kid 1 - death by accidental suicide....

kid 1 throws ball towards player with bat, in an act of self defense, player with bat strikes ball back at kid 1 and ball strikes kid 1 - kid 1 still dies and no charges brought on batter due to self defense laws...

**sTx** · 10-30-2009, 01:23 PM

I still think its crap that louisville slugger had to pay

**kaorder1999** · 10-30-2009, 01:23 PM

its ridiculous....its a loophole...

If a family member of mine is struck by a vehicle and killed can I sue the vehicle manufacturer for not putting a warning label on the car that says this vehicle can kill if a pedestrian walks in front of it while its in motion?

**baseballcoach13** · 10-30-2009, 01:25 PM

If you need a warning label on a helmet to warn you of the danger than you a huge DA and should not be allowed to play. Idiots like this are the reason you cant buy anything that doesn't have 60 warning labels. Yall bought a car seat or a stroller lately? I bet half the cost goes to putting the warning labels on.
This is part of the Pussification of America.

**coachc45** · 10-30-2009, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
It is apparent that many of you are clueless on the motives for litigation. This family only sued for $850,000 and $750,000 was accounted for in lost wages....The family wanted to change the policy itself and try to promote a safer playing environment for the players so that other families don't have to suffer the same grief and hardship that they endured by losing their son. If this were greed-based tort, then they would have asked for a lot more money.

Anyone ever seen the warning labels on helmets for football? Common sense tells everyone that there are inherent risks associated with playing the game, but the warning label is there to educate people and make sure everyone is well aware of that risk.

And if you are too stupid to know that if you are standing 60'6" in front of a big guy with a big stick who is try to hit the baseball you just threw at him really hard and far.... that you might get hit and be seriously injured...then you are probably too stupid to read the label on the bat anyway.

Plus if you are pitching and the guy is using a bat 60'6" away, how might you read the label.... unless of course it lights up! Maybe the batter should have to read it to the pitcher before he swings!!!

Frivolous lawsuit!!!

Plus, where did you read that they only sued for $850,000, it said the reward was $850,00.... juries have the right to award less or more than what is sued for.

**kaorder1999** · 10-30-2009, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by baseballcoach13
If you need a warning label on a helmet to warn you of the danger than you a huge DA and should not be allowed to play. Idiots like this are the reason you cant buy anything that doesn't have 60 warning labels. Yall bought a car seat or a stroller lately? I bet half the cost goes to putting the warning labels on.
This is part of the Pussification of America.

whoa

Thread: Family wins lawsuit against Louisville Slugger....what's your take on this?

Thread Tools

Display

Family wins lawsuit against Louisville Slugger....what's your take on this?

Posting Permissions