Is Lawsuit Involving Little League Bat Wrong?

Larry Knapp

Contributor

0 CommentsPrint ArticleSubscribe

Today a brain injured child's lawyer filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the metal bat (from which a baseball launched hitting the boy in the chest just above his heart causing it to arrest for 15 to 20 minutes), Little League Baseball (who endorsed the bat with a seal of approval) and Sports Authority (the retailer that sold the bat).  The news of the lawsuit brought the usual knee jerk reaction from many bloggers:

"Why do people always look for a reason or throw blame without realizing that sometimes accidents just happen and that there was nothing that could have been done to prevent them."

"Does this mean I can get drunk, fall down on the sidewalk and sue Budweiser for manufacturing beer, the bar for selling it and the city for installing a sidewalk?"

"Just HOW do you think this lawsuit is going to make the sport safer?"

"What a total embarassment for America, this is close on the boiling coffee case. "

I will be the first one to admit that I am biased.  That said, people need to stop a moment and consider the damage these type of cavalier comments do to our civil justice system.  It's the best system going.  Period.  There is no other on the planet that serves the function of requiring wrongdoers to take responsibility and fairly compensate the injured.  In addition, the effect of a "big bad" lawsuit is to make corporate profiteers consider the consequences of the products they put on the market for the public to consume.  This particular lawsuit may, at first blush, sound poor.  However, maybe the plaintiff's lawyer can prove that the manufacturer, the retailer and the approving organization (who all made money) put an unreasonably dangerous product on the market.  Maybe the plaintiff's lawyer can't.  However, I would rather see this brain damaged child's future care be paid for by the entities that profited from the sale of a defective dangerous bat than out of public funds.