Injuries during sporting events are considered accepted risks of the activity in viritually every state.  I was curious what was going on here so looked up some articles and the appellate opinoin that explains why this case was allowed to proceed at all.  While it got some attention, it's an aberrant result that has no meaning or value to anyone other than the participants.  

In this New Jersey case, the trial court (properly) dismissed the complaint without discussion because plaintiff did not allege the the coach was reckless.  But the dismissal was without analysis (suggesting the court thought the case was borderline frivolous).  For some reason, the plaintiff appealed and the appellate case reversed and sent it back down so the trial court could consider whether there was recklessness alleged in the complaint.  The trial court should have just entered a more thorough order of dismissal.  Instead, he let the case go to trial, where the plaintiff lost (no money awarded).  Waste of time for everyone involved and should have never happened.

In other words, the entire proceeding had far more to do with some poor judicial rulings in letting the case go forward than anything else.  Coaches are not going to start getting sued for game decisions and injuries.

" Coaches are not going to start getting sued for game decisions and injuries."

 

Actually this coach did get sued. Fortunately for now he was not ruled against. I hope you are right and this does not become common, but I do recall a coach either being sued or fired for benching a kid up in Massachusetts. The world is going crazy in front of our eyes.

BrownIndian posted:

" Coaches are not going to start getting sued for game decisions and injuries."

 

Actually this coach did get sued. Fortunately for now he was not ruled against. I hope you are right and this does not become common, but I do recall a coach either being sued or fired for benching a kid up in Massachusetts. The world is going crazy in front of our eyes.

As I said, this was an entirely aberrant and unusual event that doesn't support these broad, sweeping statements.  There are always going to be unusual sitautions and exceptions to the rule, including in litigation, and that's solely what this case represents. 

Media reports of aberrant and unusual events sometimes cause us to lose perspective.  Operator error or product defects may cause your neighbor's microwave to explode and burn his house down.  That does not mean it's normal, that microwaves are generally dangerous, or that the world is "going crazy in front of our eyes."

People are not going to start suing the millions of coaches in our country for countless reasons, including that the law doesn't allow it.  It's unfortunate alarmists, anecdotal reports, and misinformation will make some think otherwise.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×