Coomer The Hot Dog Douche Is At It Again!

[gblowfish]

This guy is the biggest douche in Overland Park... and that's saying something!

http://news.yahoo.com/fan-injured-ho...155248090.html

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — If it had been a foul ball or broken bat that struck John Coomer in the eye as he watched a Kansas City Royals game, it's unlikely the courts would have forced the team to pay for the surgeries and suffering he's endured.

But because it was a hot dog thrown by the team mascot — behind the back, no less — he just may have a case.

The Missouri Supreme Court is weighing whether the "baseball rule" — a legal standard that protects teams from being sued over fan injuries caused by events on the field, court or rink — should also apply to injuries caused by mascots or the other personnel that teams employ to engage fans.

Because the case could set a legal precedent, it could change how teams in other cities and sports approach interacting with fans at their games.

Coomer, of Overland Park, Kan., says he was injured at a September 2009 Royals game when the team's lion mascot, Sluggerrr, threw a 4-ounce, foil-wrapped wiener into the stands that struck his eye. He had to have two surgeries — one to repair a detached retina and the other to remove a cataract that developed and implant an artificial lens. Coomer's vision is worse now than before he was hurt and he has paid roughly $4,800 in medical costs, said his attorney, Robert Tormohlen.

Coomer, 53, declined to discuss the case. His lawsuit seeks an award of "over $20,000" from the team, but the actual amount he is seeking is likely much greater. Tormohlen declined to discuss the actual amount.

The Jackson County jurors who first heard the case two years ago sided with the Royals, saying Coomer was completely at fault for his injury because he wasn't aware of what was going on around him. An appeals court overturned that decision in January, however, ruling that while being struck by a baseball is an inherent risk fans assume at games, being hit with a hotdog isn't.

The state Supreme Court heard oral arguments last month, but didn't indicate when it might issue its ruling.

Few cases had addressed the level of legal duty, or obligation, a mascot owes to fans, so Coomer's case is being closely watched by teams throughout the country, said Tormohlen.

"If a jury finds that the activity at issue is an inherent and unavoidable risk, the Royals owe no duty to their spectators," Tormohlen said. "No case has extended the no-duty rule to the activities of a mascot."

The Royals, whose spokesman declined to comment on the case while it is pending, have argued that the hotdog toss has been a popular fan attraction at Kauffman Stadium since 2000 and is as much part of the game experience as strikeouts and home runs.

From mascot races and T-shirt cannons to free Wi-Fi and stadium sushi stands, teams have been doing everything they can to convince fans that the live experience is worth the high ticket and concession prices and is better than watching games on television.

"You have this competition with teams engaged in pushing the envelope trying to make the experience at the event better than what you can experience at home," said Jordan Kobritz, a professor in the Sports Management Department at SUNY Cortland. "You also have the fan mentality in which risk today is more tolerable than it's been in our history."

A ruling in Coomer's favor, or one that at least assigns partial blame to the mascot, could force teams to rethink their promotions, or at least take additional measures to keep spectators safe, Kobritz said.

Bob Jarvis, a sports law professor at Nova Southeastern University in Florida, said a 1997 California case set an important precedent when a state appeals court ruled that mascots are not an essential part of a baseball game. In that case, a minor league baseball team's dinosaur brushed against a fan, distracting him right before he was struck by a ball that broke several bones in his face. The court said mascot antics aren't essential or integral to the playing of a game.

Furthermore, not all courts have treated the baseball rule as sacrosanct. Earlier this year, the Idaho Supreme Court allowed a fan who lost an eye to a foul ball at a minor league baseball game to proceed with his lawsuit against the team. The court said that since baseball fan injuries are so rare in Idaho, there didn't seem to be a compelling reason for the court to step in.

In the Kansas City case, a ruling in the Royals' favor would indicate that mascots are, indeed, an essential part of the game experience, Jarvis said. If that happens, the Kansas City case would likely supplant Lowe's as the one attorneys look at when deciding whether to file a lawsuit on behalf of an injured fan.

"If you could get a court to go the other way and say in-game entertainment is a natural part of playing baseball in the U.S. in the 21st century, that would be a tremendous precedent that could cut off future lawsuits," Jarvis said.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by Canofbier

Calm down, dude. There's a difference between getting hit by a foul ball (which you're watching for and expecting) and being hit in the eye by a metal-wrapped hot dog (which ****ing nobody should expect).

No not really, in fact, one is larger and traveling at a greater rate of speed. Pay attention, you are at a sporting event. End of story.

[Halfcan]

How could a hotdog do that kind of damage-thrown behind the back no less? And how in the world did this idiot not know what was going on. Kids and fans clamour for free stuff. I wonder how much damage someone could do to him with a fist for being a dumbass?

[teedubya]

"That bitch wouldn't have gotten raped if she had paid attention and didn't wear that sexy ass dress..." [/bwillie]

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by BWillie

You sir, should take responsibility for your own actions. If you were hit by a foul ball, still want Royals to pay for it? I bet you are the kind of guy that when you are at your friends house, you fall down his stairs, injuring yourself, and you expect him to pay for it. The kind of guy that has an acorn fall off of your neighbors tree, and you send a invoice to your neighbor for clean up. The kind of guy that slams into the back of a caravan full of illegal immigrants, injures all of them, but yells at them for your damage because they don't have insurance.

I can't tell if this is serious or not. I sure hope not.

[seclark]

Originally Posted by Halfcan

How could a hotdog do that kind of damage-thrown behind the back no less? And how in the world did this idiot not know what was going on. Kids and fans clamour for free stuff. I wonder how much damage someone could do to him with a fist for being a dumbass?

he just wasn't keeping an eye out for hot dogs.
sec

[BigMeatballDave]

Why is the guy a douche?

[Halfcan]

There is a lesson here- watch for flying weiners at all times-or you might lose an eye.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I can't tell if this is serious or not. I sure hope not.

I am simply floored by all of you on this guys side. Society has certainly taken a turn for the worst. Nobody takes personal accountability for anything nowadays. They always think it's someone elses fault. I mean it doesn't matter what it is, a tornado could come, blow down your house, you'd blame the Weather Channel and sue them.

[jettio]

I think the only reason the Royals won the first trial was that their lawyers argued that anybody that would go to watch the Royals in September 2009 had to be a perfect idiot unless Zach Greinke was pitching.

Once the Royals got the boxscore into evidence over the strenuous objections of Coomer's lawyer, the jury made up its mind that Coomer had it coming.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by BWillie

No not really, in fact, one is larger and traveling at a greater rate of speed. Pay attention, you are at a sporting event. End of story.

I bet you never put your eyes down to put down your beer or look at your program. I bet during a gimmick promotion, you're never looking at the scoreboard or looking around to see what's going on in the Left Field section. I'm sure you never read a program or check your phone for messages. I'm sure you never turn to your friend or turn behind you to chat with somebody else.

Launching stuff into the stands is an unnecessary risk that has NOTHING to do with the game. The Royals assumed that risk when they chose to do it, and I'm sure their insurance has made them well aware of that. It's the Royals, not the fan, that needs to take personal responsibility. It's not like the guy was doing anything stupid. It sounds like he was just sitting there.

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by BWillie

I am simply floored by all of you on this guys side. Society has certainly taken a turn for the worst. Nobody takes personal accountability for anything nowadays. They always think it's someone elses fault. I mean it doesn't matter what it is, a tornado could come, blow down your house, you'd blame the Weather Channel and sue them.

you're an idiot

[Mr. Laz]

The Royals should have settled this quickly and quietly. Verify the injury and surgery stuff and then pay the guy's medical bills.

never should have made it this far imo

[mikey23545]

Originally Posted by BWillie

I am simply floored by all of you on this guys side. Society has certainly taken a turn for the worst. Nobody takes personal accountability for anything nowadays. They always think it's someone elses fault. I mean it doesn't matter what it is, a tornado could come, blow down your house, you'd blame the Weather Channel and sue them.

Yep.

If the state doesn't protect them from flying hot dogs they are incapable of defending themselves because of their uncoordination and pussification.

They then immediately run sobbing to the nearest lawyer.

"This is almost as bad as being forced to play dodgeball!!!"

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by BWillie

I am simply floored by all of you on this guys side. Society has certainly taken a turn for the worst. Nobody takes personal accountability for anything nowadays. They always think it's someone elses fault. I mean it doesn't matter what it is, a tornado could come, blow down your house, you'd blame the Weather Channel and sue them.

Your examples are totally ridiculous.

You're comparing cleaning up acorns to a guy getting thousands of dollars in surgeries.

And then in your second example, you talk about a guy who does something stupid then blames somebody else.

Now in this example, you're talking about natural events.

The Kansas City Royals are a business. When you are a business, you take on risks and liability, and you insure against it. As the property owner, they have an obligation to make sure that it's safe. There is a difference between a guy sprinting through Target and tripping and falling because of his own stupidity, and a guy casually walking through Target when he trips on a wet spot somebody forgot to clean up. This guy was minding his own business, the Royals engaged in an activity they knew was risky and avoidable, and the guy got injured.

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by mikey23545

Yep.

If the state doesn't protect them from flying hot dogs they are incapable of defending themselves because of their uncoordination and pussification.

They then immediately run sobbing to the nearest lawyer.

"This is almost as bad as being forced to play dodgeball!!!"