buddahj Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 By MATT GOURAS (AP) – 6 days ago HELENA, Mont. — A jury on Wednesday found that 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 family of Brandon Patch argued that aluminum baseball bats are dangerous because they cause the baseball to travel at a greater speed. They contended that 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. The Lewis and Clark County District Court jury awarded a total of $850,000 in damages against Louisville, Ky.,-based Hillerich & Bradsby for failure to place warnings on the product. The teen's mother, Debbie Patch, was stunned by the verdict. The family rejoiced and cried as the verdict was read. "We never expected it," she said. "We just hoped we could get the truth out for more people to see." Patch said 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. "We just want to save someone else's life," Patch said. Attorneys for Hillerich & Bradsby declined to comment. They had argued that accidents are bound to happen in baseball games and there's nothing inherently unsafe about aluminum baseball bats. A spokesman for the legendary bat-maker said Wednesday the company did nothing wrong and the verdict "appears to be an indictment of the entire sport of baseball." "We made a bat in accordance with the rules," Rick Redman said. "That bat was approved for play by baseball's organizing and governing organizations." Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association's Don't Take My Bat Away Program, a sporting goods trade group, said that while Patch's death is tragic, the exact same thing could have happened with a wooden bat. Curt Drake, one of the family's attorneys, said the jury arrived at the total by awarding $792,000 to Brandon Patch for his lost earnings and pain and suffering, an amount that goes to his estate. The family was awarded $58,000 for their pain and suffering and damages. Judge Kathy Seeley is still considering punitive damages in the case. In the verdict Wednesday, the jury also decided the product was not defective. Drake said that decision was not significant, since the jury found it posed a threat without an adequate warning label. The attorney said the family's victory will not likely change the way aluminum bats are used, but that it could help give momentum to efforts calling for a switch to wood bats in youth baseball. Metal bats came into vogue in amateur sports in the 1970s, but professional baseball still uses wood bats. Some amateur teams have decided to switch in recent years, in part due to Patch's death. "We should go back to the way baseball is supposed to be played, the way professional baseball is played," said Debbie Patch. Brandon Patch was pitching for the Miles City Mavericks when the ball ricocheted off his head, eventually falling behind first base after traveling as high as 50 feet in the air. Patch went into convulsions on the field in front of a horrified crowd and died within hours from his injury. His family's lawsuit was one of several in recent years involving aluminum bats made by Hillerich & Bradsby. Last year, the family of a New Jersey boy who suffered brain damage after he was struck by a line drive off an aluminum Louisville Slugger bat sued the company and others, saying they should have known it was dangerous. Steven Domalewski was 12 when he was struck by the ball in 2006. His family's suit is pending in New Jersey Superior Court. In 2002, the parents of teenage pitcher Jeremy Brett of Enid, Okla., won a jury verdict against Hillerich & Bradsby and were awarded damages. The couple filed suit after Brett was hit in the head with a ball hit off an aluminum bat made by the company, suffering severe head injuries. i just don't get it. i played baseball for a long time & only saw a pitcher get hit once or twice. heck i had a line drive hit back at me once when i was pitching. it's part of the game. at this rate every maker of every piece of sports equipment is eventually going to get sued for something. don't get me wrong...it is a tragedy but when you play sports you have to realize sometimes accidents can happen. that's what this was a tragic accident. i don't understand how the jury could come back with this decision when they admitted that the bat was within spec. i guess now a days everyone has to find someone else to blame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 (edited) disgusting by the way, dont put your hand in a blender. in case you didnt know. Edited November 4, 2009 by dmarc117 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Idiotic - the parents, lawyer and judge should all be smacked by a baseball bat. Maybe now they could sue the shoe company because his feet were too heavy to get out of the way or maybe the hat company because the brim was too long that he did not see it quick enough when it came off the bat. Disgusting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Like Soup Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 What's next, the baseball maker itself? Frivolous and ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Just one more reason lawyers are bad for America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delicious_bass Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Idiotic - the parents, lawyer and judge should all be smacked by a baseball bat. Maybe now they could sue the shoe company because his feet were too heavy to get out of the way or maybe the hat company because the brim was too long that he did not see it quick enough when it came off the bat. Disgusting. Agreed 100% Nice precedent to set. Wont be long before there are no more sports because everyone is terrified of being sued. We're on our way toward being a society where there is no physical contact, swearing, etc just like in Demolition Man Be well Just one more reason lawyers are bad for America. Amen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Have to agree here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Just one more reason lawyers are bad for America. Don't hate the lawya, hate the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Just one more reason lawyers are bad for America. Shouldn't you blame the jury? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Shouldn't you blame the jury? +1. How can twelve people plumb such depths of idiocy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 (edited) Why not sue the ancestors of Abner Doubleday for inventing the game? Edited November 5, 2009 by Jackass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Shouldn't you blame the jury? It's not their fault that when their emotions are tugged they shut off their brains. Fear and empathy work wonders now days on people. Anyways, there's not an IQ test to be on a jury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 +1. How can twelve people plumb such depths of idiocy? The people who argue constantly for personal responsibility seem to be blaming the smart aggressive capitalists rather than the people who actually made the decision. It just seems weird. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FWmaker Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 WARNING!!! The chips in this bag are larger and crunchier than previous versions of our product. As such, they produce a greater risk of choking. It WILL get rediculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Just one more reason lawyers are bad for America. this situation is crazy, but they have their place. I mean - let's say you build affordable housing that collapses and kills a bunch of people. If there were no lawyers you've just be able to write them off as poor people saying something like - you get what you pay for. I agree with what folk have been saying - blame the jury. perhaps better compensation for people who are on jury duty could see that more responsible people are in the courtroom to judge cases like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 lawyers arent that bad as a whole. they serve a purpose. the system needs to be fixed. but never will. lawyers are one of the biggest donors to the pols. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 It's easier in America to take advantage of an accident or an unfortunate situation than it is to work hard. Just wait your turn for something to happen and cash in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 lawyers arent that bad as a whole. they serve a purpose. the system needs to be fixed. but never will. lawyers are one of the biggest donors to the pols. Lawyers are the politicians so it is in their best interest to keep that profession as well fed as possible in case they aren't re-elected and have to return to private practice. You'll see no reform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Just wait til one of the wooden bats break and a kid gets impaled, the the bat company will get sued, again.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Lawyers are the politicians so it is in their best interest to keep that profession as well fed as possible in case they aren't re-elected and have to return to private practice. You'll see no reform. There will never be reform when the rich are involved. I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Lawyers are the politicians so it is in their best interest to keep that profession as well fed as possible in case they aren't re-elected and have to return to private practice. You'll see no reform. so much for a government for the people and of the people. I'd love to see 'x' numbers of farmers, teachers, carpenters and shop keepers mandated in congress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTed46 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Unreal, and the $ the company had to shell out for lawyers...this country is so wierd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 +1. How can twelve people plumb such depths of idiocy? Which is exactly why insurance companies are so quick to settle in so many instances. Even if they feel their client is in the right, they also have to way the risk of getting a liberal jury that says "the evil insurance companies can afford to pay this", not thinking that they just made everyone's insurance rate go up, and the price of good and services go up. More than likely this case will be appealed and the verdict either over turned or significantly reduced, but even if it is the company being sued is still out a lot of money (not just the insurance company) as their will have to gather data from files, spend time in court, etc..... Last time we were sued it was bogus as hell but the insurance company was afraid of an idiot jury. The insurance company settled, but it still ended up costing our company probably in the neighborhood of $10,000 to $15,000 in time our employees spent gathering paper work, doing depositions, etc... And that was a pretty cut and dry case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Which is exactly why insurance companies are so quick to settle in so many instances. Even if they feel their client is in the right, they also have to way the risk of getting a liberal jury that says "the evil insurance companies can afford to pay this", not thinking that they just made everyone's insurance rate go up, and the price of good and services go up. You just can't resist can you? I doubt there are 12 liberals resident in Montana. Whatever, it's worth noting that cases like this are total outliers and not reflective of the tort system as a whole. And it will be overturned / reduced on appeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 You just can't resist can you? I doubt there are 12 liberals resident in Montana. Whatever, it's worth noting that cases like this are total outliers and not reflective of the tort system as a whole. And it will be overturned / reduced on appeal. And it will still cost the company a lot of time and money that they will never get back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.