OT: Lady sues baseball bat company over metal bats
November 4th, 2009 at 3:29 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 6:27 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 6:29 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:29 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 6:52 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:30 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:36 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:36 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:46 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:56 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 6:07 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:44 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 6:13 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 7:42 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 8:02 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:47 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:53 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:48 PM ^
Agree with avoiding the namecalling of the deceased's family. I'm pretty sure they'd trade that settlement for the return of their son, in a heartbeat.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:58 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:59 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:25 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:22 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:34 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:36 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:51 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:56 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:06 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:12 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:22 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:26 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:30 PM ^
The Ball Exit Speed Ratio mark ensures a maximum exit speed of 97 miles per hour. The rules also a part of the BESR standard, have the following requirement a maximum of 2 5/8 inches diameter bat barrel and a minus-3 differential between the length and weight. (i.e.,a 33-inch-long bat cannot weigh less than 30 ounces).Little League, Pony/Colt, American Legion, and other associations generally create their own rules for their organization, but most follow the same BESR standards. It makes it easy for bat companies to all make bats to the same standards. Softball has similar rules set forth by American Softball Association (ASA).
November 4th, 2009 at 4:15 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:22 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:37 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:42 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:48 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:02 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:33 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:57 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:01 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:42 PM ^
WARNING: this object, when thrown toward a batter, may return with greater velocity that that with which it left your hand.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:46 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:52 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:42 PM ^
Not really. It's a county court in Montana. Their ruling has no precentential value in other state or federal courts.
and why was this a jury trial in the first place?
It appears that in Montana either party can request a jury in a civil case. This is usually the case in most civil claims.
November 4th, 2009 at 6:52 PM ^
Question for the lawyers out there, doesn't this set some sort of dangerous precedent? Not really. It's a county court in Montana. Their ruling has no precentential [sic] value in other state or federal courts.Also, the outcome of this case (manufacturer found liable under a failure-to-warn products liability theory -- despite adhering to regulatory or industry-accepted safety standards -- for causing an injury where the risk of said injury is painfully obvious) has unfortunately been commonplace across almost every industry in almost every state for decades. (See, e.g., Ramirez v. Plough (1993) 6 Cal.4th 539.)
It appears that in Montana either party can request a jury in a civil case. This is usually the case in most civil claims.Read: plaintiffs in Montana can unilaterally demand a jury trial. Verily the bat company did not request a jury trial in this case. Another answer: the following questions of fact existed: (1) whether the bat could be made more safe without significantly impacting the sport for which it was designed (finding: no, it could not - otherwise the inherent defect claim would have likely succeeded); (2) could an adequate warning have prevented the damage? (finding: yes, it could); (3) did the bat provide an adequate warning? (finding: no, it didn't). Had the only issues been legal in nature (e.g. did the manufacturer owe the plaintiff a legal duty), the case would likely have been resolved without a jury trial upon summary judgment motion. Because factual questions existed, they were to be resolved by a jury (see Subrosa's answer, above).
November 4th, 2009 at 3:59 PM ^
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 headAlso, for a 56mph pitch the average batted ball speed is 88.6 mph for wood bats and 92.5 mph for aluminum bats. 88.6 mph = 129.94 feet/sec 92.5 mph = 135.67 feet/sec The pitching rubber is 60 feet 6 inches from home plate. So on average, the wood batted ball would arrive at the pitcher in 0.4656 seconds and the aluminum batted ball in 0.4459 seconds, a difference of 0.0197 or 2 100ths of a second. http://paws.kettering.edu/~drussell/bats-new/alumwood.html
November 4th, 2009 at 4:00 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 4:02 PM ^
November 4th, 2009 at 3:55 PM ^