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.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by BWillie

Huh? I don't understand what you are talking about. The Royals didn't take anything to the chin.

They found that Slugger and the Royals were NOT negligent. They just overruled the previous outcome of where they originally found Mr Coomer actually the negligent party. In this case, they just found BOTH of them were NOT AT FAULT.

It's like if your tree falls on a neighbors property, and is a healthy, normal tree with no issues. A court would find that you are not at fault, and your neighbor is not at fault for that as well. Obviously different circumstances, but same result. It shouldn't make any difference if the guy had a scratched hangnail, or if he lost his life, the only thing that SHOULD matter is what happened and if there was negligence involved. The end of story. Royals don't have to pay the guy.

Then my mistake. And that's a complete shame that the guy doesn't even get payment for medical treatment.

I don't understand the ruling. If we're talking about randomly getting knocked in the eye with a hot dog, fine. But we're not. We're talking about a guy who got knocked on the head with a foil wrapped hot dog (not bubble wrapped), thrown with no arc (he was told to throw with arc), thrown behind the back errantly. It's not like the guy was sitting there waiting for the hot dog and completely duffed the catch. How many people expect to be pegged with a hot dog from a mascot throwing it behind his back?

For the sake of national law, okay, I'm glad this doesn't set the precedent of creating too much liability for in-game promotions. But the idea that a guy should be assuming risk for extracurricular stuff NOT related to the game is silly when the employee handling the promotion is acting recklessly. The only reason the hot dog had that low of an arc and that much velocity is because Slugrrr was showing off.

[Demonpenz]

People not paying attention and too busy on their cell phones.

[Psyko Tek]

Originally Posted by Canofbier

I suppose that I'm in the minority for thinking that this case isn't too terrible? If he was suing for "emotional damage" or something, that would be one thing, but the dude did literally have to have surgery, and may have permanent damage to his vision. As long as he's not asking for millions, I don't judge him too harshly.

NO. I like that
if he just wants medical to get fixed
I'm okay with that

If he wants enough money to build his own Kardasian,
nope

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Demonpenz

People not paying attention and too busy on their cell phones.

He claims he was looking at the scoreboard at scores from other games. Which is perfectly reasonable between innings.

[Mr. Kotter]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

He claims he was looking at the scoreboard at scores from other games. Which is perfectly reasonable between innings.

So...he's still a huge douche. Scott Hoy is probably his lawyer.

[SPchief]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

He claims he was looking at the scoreboard at scores from other games. Which is perfectly reasonable between innings.

You do know they announce those things over the PA system AND on the scoreboard and make a big deal out of it. Also, when the Mascot is throwing the dogs, there's a huge crowd surrounding him going Throw me one! Throw me one! You've got to be a pretty big dumbass to not be aware of what was going on. That being said, no one was at fault and the Royals should have stepped up and paid his Med bills.

[mdchiefsfan]

I'd probably thank the mascot for keeping me from having to endure the 2009 Royals' season.

[Chiefs=Champions]

This dude should have got his medical bills covered. Not to mention any loss of salary from not being able to work.

[007]

Originally Posted by Chiefs=Good

This dude should have got his medical bills covered. Not to mention any loss of salary from not being able to work.

yep

[Eleazar]

This is one of those cases where negligence seems to be laughable. You're at a ball game. Besides, during the hot dog launch they show that nonsense on the scoreboard, how could he have been looking at it and not thought to look at where it was happening?

[Lex Luthor]

Originally Posted by Cochise

This is one of those cases where negligence seems to be laughable. You're at a ball game. Besides, during the hot dog launch they show that nonsense on the scoreboard, how could he have been looking at it and not thought to look at where it was happening?

He wasn't suing for punitive damages. He wasn't suing for pain and suffering. He just wanted the Royals to pay his goddamn medical bills because their employee threw something that directly caused his detached retina.

As has been already stated, the Royals should have just paid his medical bills in a confidential settlement. It's really kind of a douche move not to.

[Lex Luthor]

Originally Posted by Mr. Kotter

So...he's still a huge douche. Scott Hoy is probably his lawyer.

If some asshole threw something in the course of his employement that hit me in the eye and caused a detached retina, I'd expect his employer to pay for my medical bills.

There's nothing wrong with that. The huge douche is the party that causes the injury and refuses to pay the medical bills. But because it's Sluggerrr and the Royals, let's blame the guy with the detached retina instead.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Cochise

This is one of those cases where negligence seems to be laughable. You're at a ball game. Besides, during the hot dog launch they show that nonsense on the scoreboard, how could he have been looking at it and not thought to look at where it was happening?

A few things....
The idea that the fan should be aware of risks should only apply to the game itself. Not stuff that happens between innings. It's not like we're talking about a foul ball here.

It's pretty simple. If a person wants a hot dog, toss him one. If the person doesn't, leave him alone. If he's not paying attention, pretty obvious that you shouldn't toss him one.

That's where the negligence comes in. Dude didn't want a hot dog and was tossed one anyway. Why was he tossed one? Because the mascot was showing off and throwing no-look hot dog tosses behind his back which means he had less control for where the hot dog was going. Ever throw a ball behind your back? How accurate are you? Even dude was paying attention, wouldn't it still catch him by surprise when a hot dog he doesn't want gets thrown at him from a really weird angle at a low arc?

[Bob Dole]

IT WAS A ****ING HOT DOG.

Bob Dole would bet you could nail him in the face with a hot dog 100 times, and there wouldn't be any injury. You know why?

BECAUSE IT IS A ****ING HOT DOG.

[KCUnited]

Phillies to contact Royals about adding potential bullpen arm Sluggggger.