Blackhawks arena sued again for fan injury; get ready for more safety netting

[Irishjim]

It’s difficult watching Chip Green talk about the injury he sustained at a Chicago Blackhawks’ playoff game against the Minnesota Wild last May. 

 

A shot from Duncan Keith flew over the protective glass into the stands, striking Green on the side of his head. Since the incident, Green has trouble formulating words and claims he can no longer do mathematical equations. He no longer works to support his family of four.

On Thursday, his attorney Colin Dunn of Clifford Law Offices filed a lawsuit against the NHL and United Center seeking $200,000 in compensation and asking the team to extend its safety netting further around the rink.

Which they probably will, because this isn’t the only lawsuit they’re facing from a fan struck by a puck in the lower bowl.

 

read full articl from puck daddy here: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/blackhawks-sued-again-for-fan-injury--get-ready-for-more-safety-netting-143307598.html

[Irishjim]

so much for the disclaimer at the arenas pay attention for pucks entering the seating area.  i almost was hit in the the head during a pre game shoot around cause my back was to the ice..that would have been my fault for not paying attention 

[flyercanuck]

My wife took one in the head at a junior game. She wasn't paying attention. Thankfully she wasn't hurt....but she won't go to games anymore.

[Vanflyer]

read full articl from puck daddy here: http://sports.yahoo....-143307598.html

 

While it sucks for that individual, I have a disgust for the rational of "more safety" at the games. I hate the meshing now and will be disgusted if there is more. I am all for protecting the fans, but there is a limit to that. First, as a fan, you agree to recognize you are watching a sport where there is risk to injury as a viewer. Secondly, you have the choice of where you want to sit (ie. to keep yourself out of harms way).

 

I don't see them putting nets around the lower seating area of baseball games (which is just as risky as hockey....foul balls etc.).

 

The story sucks, but not as bad as that young girl that got hurt. As an adult, you have a responsibility to know the risks involved in what you are going to watch in person. As a parent, you have an even greater responsibility to ensure the safety of your kids and keep them out of harms way (ie. second level seating).

 

I also thought, aside from the announcement of the risk of the game, their is a disclaimer of liability on the back of the tickets. Regardless, bummer about this guy, but he signed up for the risk and there is zero liability on the Blackhawks / arena.

[JackStraw]

I seriously doubt that the disclaimer on the back of tickets is legally binding. Furthermore, I seriously doubt that the Blackhawks (or any NHL team) would want to go through the negative publicity of going to court against one of their own fans. I'm actually amazed that the guy is only asking for $200,000. That's peanuts, the Hawks are getting off very easy here it seems.

 

As for paying attention, one of the best aspects of seeing a game live vs on TV is that you can see what's happening away from the puck. So you can be paying rapt attention to the game but still not see a puck coming at your head at 90mph. The league should take every reasonable precaution to see that fans are safe, and extending the netting seems like a pretty easy way to do that.

[Vanflyer]

I seriously doubt that the disclaimer on the back of tickets is legally binding. Furthermore, I seriously doubt that the Blackhawks (or any NHL team) would want to go through the negative publicity of going to court against one of their own fans. I'm actually amazed that the guy is only asking for $200,000. That's peanuts, the Hawks are getting off very easy here it seems.



As for paying attention, one of the best aspects of seeing a game live vs on TV is that you can see what's happening away from the puck. So you can be paying rapt attention to the game but still not see a puck coming at your head at 90mph. The league should take every reasonable precaution to see that fans are safe, and extending the netting seems like a pretty easy way to do that.

 

Your points are well taken (especially watching the play away from the puck- which is a treat for me when watching a  live game).

 

However, what is the differrence between sitting on the first base / third base line and getting nailed with a foul ball v. getting hit with a puck. You go to a live game where there are risks involved. You accept those risks as a attendee. For publick relations, the 200k is peanuts as you stated. I just think its idiotic that a fan, who understood the risks, wants compensation. Its like that lady with the hot coffee at McDonalds.

[JackStraw]

Your points are well taken (especially watching the play away from the puck- which is a treat for me when watching a  live game).

 

However, what is the differrence between sitting on the first base / third base line and getting nailed with a foul ball v. getting hit with a puck. You go to a live game where there are risks involved. You accept those risks as a attendee. For publick relations, the 200k is peanuts as you stated. I just think its idiotic that a fan, who understood the risks, wants compensation. Its like that lady with the hot coffee at McDonalds.

 

 

I think it's a lot different than the McDonalds thing. For one thing, once the customer buys the coffee there's nothing McD's can do to prevent her from spilling it, or to mitigate the harm that might occur. In this case, there's an easy and cheap solution. Compared to baseball, while I don't have any stats to back me up, I think fewer people get hit by foul balls. For one thing, the fans are farther away from home plate. For another, at a baseball game until the batter makes contact, there isn't anything else to watch. Everyone is pretty much focusing on the pitcher and the hitter and you know when something may be coming your way. So if you are paying attention you're most likely going to see the ball coming and if you brought your glove, you go home with a souvenir. At a hockey game it's a lot more random.

 

And to be honest, the whole "he should be paying attention" argument is weak imo. You go to a game, any game any sport, and you're going to talk to people, buy a drink or hot dog from a vendor, etc. This isn't asking for much, just a bit more netting. That doesn't seem like an unreasonable demand to be placing on the arenas.

[ihabs1993]

While this is a tragic event, the NHL doesn't need to do anything. It would be best if they did, but there's a contract signed by every fan as they walk in the arena. When you buy a ticket, you agree that you accept all responsibility for injury and that the stadium, team and league are not at all responsible for your safety due to a puck being launched into the stands. In fact, there are warnings before the game starts and as the game goes on about the dangers of flying pucks and that you need to be paying attention during play.

I went to a Devils game a few years ago. I showed up a few minutes late because my dad wouldn't pay for parking. We made our way to the lower bowl and we had to wait in line to get to our section. There was a stadium employee holding a stop sign that would not allow us to get to our seats while play was going on. As soon as a whistle went off, she allowed people to move to their seats until the puck was put back into play.

Yes, I think the league should take more responsibility for fan injuries. Yes, I think the arenas themselves should install more protective safety netting.

 

Whether or not the league will do anything about it is another issue entirely.

[Vanflyer]

Yes, I think the arenas themselves should install more protective safety netting.

 

Why?? I mean I sort of get it, and sort of don't. If I am going to pay 150 dollars for myself / wife or daughter to see the game in the first level, I sure don't want to watch it through a mesh. I'd rather take that money and invite 10 buddies / wives over for a bbq and watch the game on my flat screen.

 

The point I am trying to make is that when you go to see a live game, you go to see a live game and not someting through a mesh. I have the choice of where I want to sit. If I am concerned for my safety, I sit on the second level. I also understand the risks involved as an attendee and accept those risks. If I fall on the a wet floor in the causeway, then I have a complaint. If I get hit by the puck, I agreed to that risk.

[Vanflyer]

For one thing, once the customer buys the coffee there's nothing McD's can do to prevent her from spilling it

 

Once a person buys a ticket, there is nothing a arena / team can do to prevent accidental injury. Its EXACTLY the same.

[ihabs1993]

Why?? I mean I sort of get it, and sort of don't. If I am going to pay 150 dollars for myself / wife or daughter to see the game in the first level, I sure don't want to watch it through a mesh. I'd rather take that money and invite 10 buddies / wives over for a bbq and watch the game on my flat screen.

 

The point I am trying to make is that when you go to see a live game, you go to see a live game and not someting through a mesh. I have the choice of where I want to sit. If I am concerned for my safety, I sit on the second level. I also understand the risks involved as an attendee and accept those risks. If I fall on the a wet floor in the causeway, then I have a complaint. If I get hit by the puck, I agreed to that risk.

I'm not saying to completely encircle the ice surface in bubble wrap and band-aids. Just a bit more around the corners. Players whipping the puck around the boards to get the puck in deep is a big issue. Just this year, PK Subban hit a small child with a puck. The child suffered very minor injuries, but it should alert the league and arenas to make minor adjustments. Either that or everyone wears helmets.......

[JackStraw]

Once a person buys a ticket, there is nothing a arena / team can do to prevent accidental injury. Its EXACTLY the same.

Sure there is. They can install safety netting.

[Vanflyer]

Sure there is. They can install safety netting.

 

I cant wait to watch my next baseball game where I have 3rd base line seats and maybe third row through the mesh.

[AlaskaFlyerFan]

so much for the disclaimer at the arenas pay attention for pucks entering the seating area.  i almost was hit in the the head during a pre game shoot around cause my back was to the ice..that would have knocked some sense into me.

Fixed.

[Vanflyer]

PK Subban hit a small child with a puck. The child suffered very minor injuries, but it should alert the league and arenas to make minor adjustments. Either that or everyone wears helmets.......

 

I am going to be the antagonist in this dialogue. I have attended many games with my 3 year old daughter. Do you know where our seats were? 2nd level 2nd row center ice.

 

My daughter (and I) love it up there. The vantage point is enormous and the safety is great.

 

See what I am saying??

[ihabs1993]

I am going to be the antagonist in this dialogue. I have attended many games with my 3 year old daughter. Do you know where our seats were? 2nd level 2nd row center ice.

 

My daughter (and I) love it up there. The vantage point is enormous and the safety is great.

 

See what I am saying??

I'm not quite sure I follow what you're saying. So the people in the bottom bowl are just silly for purchasing those tickets because they are more dangerous and not as good on a basis of vantage point? I don't wish to poke fun at what you're saying, I just don't understand where you're coming from. I think the middle sections of an arena are perfect due to cost, safety and sight lines, but are you trying to say that lower section seats are just a waste of money?

[flyercanuck]

@ihabs1993

 

You chose where you sit. You're a lot less likely to get hit by a puck at center ice in the 2nd section than you would be sitting just over the glass and closer to the corner. If you're sitting in those seats, you'd better be paying attention.

[jammer2]

  I'm with Van, I HATE the meshing. Bottom line, if you are in the lower bowl, your job is to pay attention at all times and keep your head on a swivel. I'm seen some horrific injuries over the years, and most came from people yapping and not paying attention to where the puck is.

[pilldoc]

We cannot bubble wrap the entire rink.  That would be ridiculous.  At what point does society take responsibility of their actions.  As a previous poster mentioned, baseball is a prime example.  A batted ball coming at you is just as fast and hard a frozen piece of rubber known as a hockey puck.  MLB puts of netting directly behind home plate, as most other college and minor venues do, but not down the 1st and 3rd base lines.  I have seen of individuals, not paying attention, get injured due to a batted foul ball.

 

Though I feel bad for the individual, the Chicago Blackhawks, IMO should not be held liable.  There is an inherent risk when attending sporting events.

 

Here is what I found....

 

An excellent article written by an attorney pretty stating, that a spectator assumes an inherit risk when attending a sporting event such as hockey or baseball.

 

http://www.law.du.edu/documents/sports-and-entertainment-law-journal/issues/05/05-augustine.pdf

 

some other articles......

http://www.law.illinois.edu/bljournal/post/2009/11/01/Danger-Sporting-Events-Can-Be-Hazardous-To-Your-Rights!.aspx

 

 

and I found this also.....

 

http://personal-injury.lawyers.com/personal-injury-basics/spectator-sports-personal-injury-risks-and-rights.html

 

Spectator Sports: Personal Injury Risks and Rights

POSTED IN Personal Injury Basics BY Margaret Jasper for Lawyers.com^sm

Update

A lawsuit against the Los Angeles Dodgers will test the law of spectator sports injuries. The family of San Francisco Giants fan Brian Stow is suing the Dodgers organization after Stow was beaten and gravely injured in the Dodgers Stadium parking lot following a game there.

 

The lawsuit says the Dodgers failed to provide reasonable security to protect Stow. It blames the failure on cutbacks to security made because Dodgers owner Frank McCourt is in dire financial shape. It also blames a "half-off" beer promotion at the game. Fan against fan violence is not unknown in sports, big or small. It's also not new at Dodger Stadium. Considering this, it looks like a jury will decide whether the Dodgers' precautions and response were adequate or lacking.

 

Original Article

It's springtime and you were lucky enough to get a great seat on opening day at the ballpark. As you turn to order a hot dog from the vendor, a line drive foul ball is headed right at you and fractures your jaw. You spend the night in the emergency room. You are in terrible pain, you can't eat, and you miss a few weeks of work. Topping it off, you missed the game. Can you sue?

 

Enter at Your Own Risk

Owners and operators of sporting venues and events are well aware of the risk of injury to spectators. It's the law of averages. With all the foul balls and hockey pucks that fly into the stands, someone is bound to be hit sooner or later.

 

In order to avoid liability, tickets to sporting events often contain warnings advising spectators that the facility won't be responsible if a spectator is injured at the sporting event. In addition, warning signs are generally posted and the announcer usually reminds the fans to be aware of wayward balls.

 

A spectator who attends a sporting event, whether it's a major league baseball game or a child's lacrosse game, is presumed to know there is a risk of being hit by a flying object. So, when you take that chance, you are waiving your right to sue for any injuries that result.

 

This waiver is based on the legal doctrine known as assumption of risk, and most courts will dismiss a personal injury lawsuit seeking damages for injuries sustained at a sporting event.

 

Exceptions

Of course, whenever there is a rule, there is always an exception. If the owners of the sports facility didn't take adequate precautions to protect the fans, they may be liable for injuries sustained as a result of their negligence.

 

For example, baseball stadiums place a protective screen behind home plate because most foul balls are hit in this area. The screen protects the fans sitting near home plate who have less time to react. If there is a large hole in the screen that allows a ball to get through and injure a spectator, the owners of the facility may be liable if they were aware of the hole and negligently failed to repair it.

 

Also, if you are injured as a result of an incident that is not foreseeable, i.e., not one that a reasonable person would expect to occur at a sporting event, you may also be able to sue. For example, you are at a basketball game and a fight breaks out among the players that spills over into the seats. During the melee, you are struck by one of the players and injured. This isn't an injury that could have been anticipated and you may be able to sue.

 

Of course, the sports facility must also make sure that the premises are safely maintained; there are no hazardous conditions, such as broken stairs and loose railings; and there is adequate security to handle the size of the crowd.

 

Proving Damages

If you are injured at a sporting event, you should file an incident report with the facility and make sure the details are accurately recorded in the report. Ask for a copy of the report for your file. If there were witnesses to the incident, try and obtain their names and contact information, and include this information in the report.

You should also seek immediate medical treatment for your injuries and make sure your medical provider records the details of the incident in your medical report. Take pictures to document your injuries.

 

You could recover the cost of your medical bills, out-of-pocket costs, lost wages, and compensation for the pain and suffering you endured due to your injury. The goal in awarding damages is to try and return you to the position you would have been in if you had not been injured in the first place, not to mention giving you the ability to enjoy another event.

 

 

The bottom underlying theme I have found while google searching is this.....

 

Spectators Assume the Risks

When fans are injured at sporting events, some attempt to file personal injury lawsuits. These lawsuits are often unsuccessful because most sporting arenas have "enter at your own risk" polices.

 

Often disclaimers and warnings are even printed on the tickets, absolving the public arena of any liability for injuries sustained as a result of attending the sporting event.

Warning signs are also ever-present at sporting events and usually there are safety announcements that are made over the P.A. system during the events.

 

Courts have historically ruled that people who are injured or killed as a result of attending a sporting event are not entitled to file personal injury lawsuits against the public venues because by attending the sporting events the court assumes that they are aware of the inherent dangers.

 

Certainly in any environment with objects traveling through the air at speeds of up to 120 mph, there is a significant risk of injury upon impact.

There are always exceptions though, and in cases in which the court feels as though the sporting arena did not take appropriate steps to protect the safety of fans, the personal injury lawsuits may be allowed to go forward.

[JackStraw]

Though I feel bad for the individual, the Chicago Blackhawks, IMO should not be held liable

 

That Hawks are not named in the suit. Just the arena and the NHL.

[JackStraw]

  I'm with Van, I HATE the meshing. Bottom line, if you are in the lower bowl, your job is to pay attention at all times and keep your head on a swivel. I'm seen some horrific injuries over the years, and most came from people yapping and not paying attention to where the puck is.

 

Sorry jammer, but I have to disagree. First, spectators don't have a "job" when they pay money to watch a sporting event. Nobody sits their with their eyes on the puck for 60 minutes. You talk to people, you buy crap from a vendor, you check the scoreboard, you scan the crowd for cute girls/guys... let's be realistic. And I already mentioned that watching play away from the puck is one of the main benefits of seeing a game live.

 

But beyond all that even, haven't you ever seen an NHL player get hit with a puck? Remember Marc Staal? He saw it coming but couldn't get out of the way. Happens all the time. How about a goalie who tries to stop a puck and misses it? And who is to say that this guy wasn't paying attention? You think a puck coming at you at speed is really that easy to dodge or catch? Batters get hit by pitched balls all the time. Pitchers get hit by batted balls all the time. Spectators aren't trained athletes, they can't be expected to judge the path of an object moving at that speed.

 

And if we're going to bring up baseball as one example, how about we bring up motor racing as another? In 1955 82 spectators were killed, some in extremely gruesome fashion, at Le Mans when a car left the track and broke up sending pieces into the crowd. Should the people responsible for organizing racing have just shrugged and said, "well, it's a motor race. There are going to be crashes. Enter at your own risk and pay attention."

 

Sometimes, whether or not anybody is liable for what happened to this guy, you just go ahead and do the right thing. In this case, improving crowd safety at what would be very minimal cost and inconvenience to anybody is the right thing and should be a no-brainer.

[pilldoc]

That Hawks are not named in the suit. Just the arena and the NHL.

 

oops my bad...i missed that part. regardless IMO an individual still accepts the risks when attending a game

[Vanflyer]

I'm not quite sure I follow what you're saying. So the people in the bottom bowl are just silly for purchasing those tickets because they are more dangerous and not as good on a basis of vantage point?

 

I would not say silly and do not get me wrong, I have no problem with sitting on first level. But truthfully, from a vantage point / safety perspective, those seats (which I had season tix to a while back), where the best. I had the two seats on the isle second row (so could see over the glass). A hop skip and a jump and I had access to concessions and bathroom. While not the priority, when you have a 3 year old, it certainly adds a dimension of convenience.

 

Add to that (right, wrong or indifferent), I got tired of the "snobs" / "corporate stiffs" in the lower bowl. Much more enjoyable to watch a game with some blue collar folks- just my and my daughters preference.

[ihabs1993]

@ihabs1993

 

You chose where you sit. You're a lot less likely to get hit by a puck at center ice in the 2nd section than you would be sitting just over the glass and closer to the corner. If you're sitting in those seats, you'd better be paying attention.

 

I would not say silly and do not get me wrong, I have no problem with sitting on first level. But truthfully, from a vantage point / safety perspective, those seats (which I had season tix to a while back), where the best. I had the two seats on the isle second row (so could see over the glass). A hop skip and a jump and I had access to concessions and bathroom. While not the priority, when you have a 3 year old, it certainly adds a dimension of convenience.

 

Add to that (right, wrong or indifferent), I got tired of the "snobs" / "corporate stiffs" in the lower bowl. Much more enjoyable to watch a game with some blue collar folks- just my and my daughters preference.

I completely agree that the upper bowl offers a better vantage point and higher safety, and that you are the only one responsible for choosing your spot, but just because you chose that seat doesn't mean the league or the arena shouldn't protect you in the most basic sense. If a shot were to find its way into the second bowl, which I understand is highly unlikely, and someone was hit, what would the excuse be then? Hockey is a highly unpredictable game, and for the league to only put netting where they "think" pucks are going to go is negligent. I find it a bit odd that anyone would argue against more protection just so they can see the game a bit better. The netting is very thin. It's not made out of concrete. And if that's your attitude towards it, don't go to games. Stay at home, watching it in HD where the sightlines are perfect and there's no chance of you getting injured.

 

The point is, this needs to be a better joint effort. Arenas need to protect their fans better but fans need to understand the risk of going to a hockey game and that they need to be alert at all times.