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.

[Lex Luthor]

Originally Posted by 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.

Actually it was a detached retina.

If Brainiac threw something at Bob Dole's eye and caused Bob Dole to have a detached retina, would Bob Dole say "That's fine, it was just a ****ing hot dog"?

[007]

Originally Posted by 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.

Well, to be fair, we are talking about Kauffman Stadium hot dogs here.

[DenverChief]

Originally Posted by gblowfish

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

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

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

I'm assuming this is a MO law?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Brittanie_Cecil

The NHL implemented mandatory safety netting above the glass behind and to the sides of both ends of the rink in all arenas. The netting has also been implemented by other organizations in many arenas world-wide. A lawsuit brought by Brittanie's family against the NHL and the arena was settled out of court for $1.2 million in April 2004.^[5][6] The Brittanie Nichole Cecil Memorial Scholarship Fund has since been created, which collects donations at every Blue Jackets home game

[DenverChief]

Which makes me wonder if the lady at the Boston game is going to be paid handsomly

[mdchiefsfan]

Originally Posted by Guru

Well, to be fair, we are talking about Kauffman Stadium hot dogs here.

[TLO]

Originally Posted by 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.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by Brainiac

Actually it was a detached retina.

If Brainiac threw something at Bob Dole's eye and caused Bob Dole to have a detached retina, would Bob Dole say "That's fine, it was just a ****ing hot dog"?

Bob Dole would say that it it was a ****ING HOT DOG.

Probably some pre-existing issue if something that soft detaches a retina.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by Big Smoke

She probably received a concussion and 2 detached retinas.

[BossChief]

I have no dog in this fight, but for the royals to not have paid his medical bills for this is simply a douche move.

I can see the team (a multiple billion dollar industry) not wanting to be liable when a home run ball hits a fan and he/she gets hurt, but if Puig catches a ball and then fires it at a fan in the stands that isn't paying attention and that causes injury, the team should pay the medical bills AT MINIMUM.

Now, before you guys go all "haha yeah because Puig throwing a baseball at a fan and a guy getting hit by a hotdog are the same thing " ...I used that comparison to illustrate the difference between "normal expectations of a sporting event" and "something that happens outside the framework of a sporting event"...like getting hit in the face with a hotdog hard enough to detach a retina.

Sorry Royals fans, but that's just a douche move

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

Bob Dole would say that it it was a ****ING HOT DOG.

Probably some pre-existing issue if something that soft detaches a retina.

Sorry, but if I was in the same situation as this guy and sustained a serious injury because a team employee was showing off, I'd expect the team to "make me whole" again.

Your second sentence is probably true though and you have a point.

Kinda like if I borrow my friends 2001 impala that has mechanical issues to go to the store and those mechanical issues cause the car to breakdown...I shouldn't have to pay for his repairs unless I was doing 110 on the interstate when they happened, right?

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by DenverChief

I'm assuming this is a MO law?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Brittanie_Cecil

It should be a different standard. Fans go to games assuming the risk of getting hit by a ball or puck. Because it's part of the game. They shouldn't have to assume the risk as well for a fan promotion between innings that has nothing to do with the game. A foul ball is an accident. An errant hot dog can easily be controlled.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by BossChief

I have no dog in this fight, but for the royals to not have paid his medical bills for this is simply a douche move.

That likely would have changed the outcome of the case. The assumption would be that the team was admitting responsibility.

Kind of like when someone falls down in your retail establishment. Though it's human nature, the LAST thing you want to do is apologize.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

That likely would have changed the outcome of the case. The assumption would be that the team was admitting responsibility.

Kind of like when someone falls down in your retail establishment. Though it's human nature, the LAST thing you want to do is apologize.

I agree. Royals were put in a tough spot. Can't say I blame them. Not only do they open themselves up for paying more than just medical damages, they also are being looked to by all sports stadiums to set a standard. If the Royals don't take a hard stance here, then all stadiums have to assume liability.

So I don't blame either coomer or the Royals for how they're approaching this.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

That likely would have changed the outcome of the case. The assumption would be that the team was admitting responsibility.

Kind of like when someone falls down in your retail establishment. Though it's human nature, the LAST thing you want to do is apologize.

They should have taken responsibility and made an effort to alter their promotions to assure it doesn't happen again.

Jmo but that would be the right thing to do.

And if you have a store that requires people to walk in it, you should be aware enough to make sure the floor is safe to walk on.

This analogy is gonna suck, but hopefully the jest of it is understood...

If I walk through a Sears and while I'm walking on a tiled floor an employee splashes soapy water at my feet, causing me to fall...and I sustain injuries...of course the store should pay my medical bills AT MINIMUM.

Not come back at me with "you should have noticed the employee was trying to do his/her job and provide a clean floor for our customers. It's your fault you didn't get out of the way. Pay your own medical bills"

Sorry, but like I said that's a douche way to run a huge business and unless there is something else at play here, the team should be responsible for its actions.

[MTG#10]

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

Bob Dole would say that it it was a ****ING HOT DOG.

Probably some pre-existing issue if something that soft detaches a retina.

It was tightly wrapped in foil.