Parents to Sue Maker of Metal Baseball Bats Over Son's Injury

[akulahawk]

RD: Thanks for the analysis on this.

[Quietpi]

A majority of these types of suits are intended to squeeze a settlement out of the deepest "deep pocket." The plaintiffs are hoping against hope that the defendants don't hold out for a trial. Since the cost of a trial is so high, most insurers (defendants) will settle, almost always for a fraction of the sum sought in the suit. Still, that could well be in the high six figures, or seven figures. That's why we pay what we do for insurance of every sort.

BTW, (IANABP) (I am not a baseball person), but the last I recall hearing, testing showed that metal bats did not confer any significant advantage in hitting power. They actually proved to be safer, because they don't break.

[ADIDAS]

While what happened in tragic and of course, since the son was a victim, someone must pay.

Our society has inherent risks and life is not fair. Bad things happen to "innocent victims".

Metal bat manufacturer' don't hide the fact that they allow they balls to be hit harder, hell, they advertise it.

I do feel for their child and perhaps we need as a society look at how we can help these type of victims since these type of accidents are rare, but if they happen to your family, the results are devastating.

Many people have accidents that wreck their lives and they are not able to get any real compensation.

There efforts are misguided.

[Tom98915]

Originally Posted by 1buba

Ok, RD has proven I'm borderline brain-dead on legal matters. I'm just wondering about this case. IF it ended up going to trial (the bat manufacturing part) and they found the bat maker had no role - would this be precedent help the gun makers? Just curious if 1) it is possible, 2) is it probable.

this just proves that many lawyers are the provervial ambulance chasers who could care less who they hurt as long as they make lots of money.