The “Baseball Rule” Faces an Interesting Test One of the many beauties of baseball, affectionately known as “America’s pastime,” is the ability for people to come to the stadium and become ingrained in the action and get the chance to interact with their heroes. Going to a baseball game, as opposed to going to most other sporting events, truly gives a fan the opportunity to take part in the action. However, this can come at a steep price as foul balls enter the stands at alarming speeds and occasionally strike spectators. According to a recent study, approximately 1,750 people get hurt each year by batted 1 balls at Major League Baseball (MLB) games, which adds up to twice every three games. The 2015 MLB season featured many serious incidents that shed light on the issue of 2 spectator protection. ​ This has led to heated debates among the media, fans, and even players and 3 managers as to what should be done to combat this issue. ​ Currently, there is a pending class action lawsuit against Major League Baseball (“MLB”). The lawsuit claims that MLB has not 1 David Glovin, Baseball Caught Looking as Fouls Injure 1,750 Fans a Year, BLOOMBERG BUSINESS (Sept. 9, 2014, ​ ​ ​ ​ 4:05 PM), http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014­09­09/baseball­caught­looking­as­fouls­injure­1­750­fans­a­year. 2 On June 5, a woman attending a Boston Red Sox game was struck in the head by a broken bat that flew into the seats along the third baseline. See Woman hurt by bat at Red Sox game released from hospital, NEW YORK POST (June ​ ​ ​ ​ 12, 2015, 9:32 PM), http://nypost.com/2015/06/12/woman­hurt­by­bat­at­red­sox­game­released­from­hospital/. On August 21, a woman sitting behind the Detroit Tigers dugout was hit in the head by a foul ball. See Jason Beck, Fan ​ ​ ​ struck by foul ball evaluated at hospital, MLB.COM (Aug. 22, 2015), ​ ​ ​ http://m.mlb.com/news/article/144581376/fan­injured­on­anthony­goses­foul­ball. On August 23, a woman sitting just past the camera well on the first baseline at Wrigley Field was taken to the hospital after being struck by a foul ball. See Fan struck by foul ball, taken off on stretcher at Wrigley, CHICAGO TRIBUNE (Aug. 24, 2015, 7:44 AM), ​ ​ ​ ​ http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct­foul­ball­fan­wrigley­20150823­story.html. On September 9, a man was injured by a foul ball while sitting in the fourth row at Fenway Park. See Another fan injured during ​ Red Sox game at Fenway Park; man hit by foul liner, MASSLIVE.COM (Sept. 9, 2015, 9:15 PM), ​ ​ ​ http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2015/09/another_fan_injured_during_red.html. 3 Chicago Cubs manager Joe Maddon has stated, “when you are at the ballpark and you are in those particular locations, watch what’s going on. Every time a ball is pitched, you look… just pay attention.” See Fan struck by foul ​ ball, taken off on stretcher at Wrigley. However, Detroit Tigers pitcher Justin Verlander has said that the safety ​ netting issue is “something that needs to be addressed immediately.” See Anthony Gose, Justin Verlander cautions ​ ​ ​ MLB: Extend netting ‘before it’s too late,’ ESPN.COM (Aug. 22, 2015), ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13486481/fan­hit­foul­ball­detroit­tigers­home­game­texas­rangers. 4 done enough to protect fans from projectiles entering the stands. ​ The suit does not seek any monetary relief, but states that MLB should be forced to add protective netting that goes from 5 foul pole to foul pole at all MLB ballparks, including those in the minor leagues. This class action is not a particularly novel issue. The fight is against the long­standing doctrine known as the “Baseball Rule,” which states that franchises and owners will not be held liable for injuries to spectators if they take reasonable measures to protect those fans that sit in dangerous areas of ballparks, especially those behind home plate. This rule was first stated by the Kansas City Court of Appeals in 1914 when a spectator that was sitting in the front row 6 behind home plate at a professional baseball game was struck in the head by a batted ball. ​ While this section behind home plate was screened in with chicken netting, this ball was hit hard 7 enough to tear through thee worn down netting and strike the spectator. ​ Over time, many states have ultimately adopted this rule, which generally states that a stadium owner must: “(1) screen the most dangerous area of the ballpark, usually behind home plate; and (2) provide that such screening adequately protects those spectators who may reasonably desire the course of an 4 Class Action Complaint at 3­5, Payne v. Office of the Commissioner of Baseball, https://www.hbsslaw.com/uploads/case_downloads/files/case_pdfs/MLB/07­13­2015_Complaint_Payne_v__MLB_ No__15­cv­3229.pdf. 5 Id. at 5­6. Further, one of the lead lawyers for the class action, Bob Hilliard, believes that the “Baseball Rule” ​ ​ should be abolished, since “[y]ou can’t assume risk that you can’t protect against.” See Danger at the Ballpark, ​ ​ supra note 5. ​ 6 Edling v. Kansas City Baseball & Exhibition Co., 168 S.W. 908, 909 (Mo. 1914). ​ ​ 7 Id. ​ 8 ordinary game.” ​ Courts have noted that professional baseball needs its own special rule because 9 many attend these games with the hopes of catching a foul ball. But, it is doubtful that Wendy Camlin ever wished to come in contact with a baseball when she attended a Pittsburgh Pirates game at PNC Park. On April 20, 2015, while at the game, she was struck in the head by a foul ball, which resulted in a concussion, traumatic brain injury, 10 migraines, neck pain, tinnitus, anxiety, along with other ache and pains. ​ When the ball came off the bat of then­Chicago Cubs infielder Starlin Castro, Camlin was not paying attention to the 11 game and the ball caught her by surprise. ​ The game was delayed for 23 minutes while she was 12 removed from the stadium on a stretcher and brought to the hospital. She then filed a lawsuit against the Pirates, MLB, and the Sports and Exhibition Authority, seeking in excess of $35,000 13 from each of these defendants. Unfortunately, incidents like this do happen in MLB ballparks quite frequently. As such, it is reasonable to infer that the defendants were not at fault under the “Baseball Rule,” despite the ongoing class action lawsuit. However, this situation also has an interesting twist: Camlin was behind the protective netting when the ball was hit. While Castro was at the plate during the ​ ​ 8 Robert J. Thorpe, Way Out in Left Field: Crespin v. Albuquerque Baseball Club Rejects Nearly One Hundred ​ Years of American Jurisprudence by Declining to Adopt the Baseball Rule in New Mexico, 17 Sports Law. J. 267, ​ 269 (2010) (citing Benejam, 635 N.W.2d at 221). ​ ​ ​ ​ 9 Benejam v. Detroit Tigers, Inc., 635 N.W.2d 219, 221 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). ​ ​ 10 Matthew Santoni, Pittsburgh woman injured by PNC Park foul ball sues Pirates, MLB, TRIBLIVE.COM (Mar. 11, ​ ​ ​ ​ 2016, 3:51 PM), http://triblive.com/mobile/10129076­96/camlin­ball­foul. 11 Id. ​ 12 Id. ​ 13 Id. ​ 14 second inning, Camlin was walking to her front row seat behind home plate. ​ Her back was 15 turned, and she was standing close to the protective netting. ​ Castro hit a foul ball straight back 16 into the netting, however the ball pushed the net back and struck Camlin in the head. ​ Unlike the 17 famous 1914 incident that occurred in Kansas City, this ball never went through the netting. Clearly, these are very unusual circumstances that the founders of the “Baseball Rule” might not have expected. Therefore, it will be even more interesting to see how the Pennsylvania court will apply the Rule to this specific case. While the Court might find that the defendants complied with the first element of the rule (screening the area behind home plate), it will also have to decide if the netting adequately protected patrons who sit in that designated area. This will be a tough battle because, while the netting stopped the ball from entering the stands, the ball did still make contact with a spectator. The question then becomes “What is adequate protection?” If placing netting in all ballparks still allows for balls to harm fans, can any other method of protection truly be considered adequate while still giving fans what they want — the ability remain close to the action and the chance to catch foul balls. while giving fans what they want. That will be for the Court to decide. The court’s decision in this case is significant, especially in the wake of Commissioner Rob Manfred’s recommendation that all MLB teams add extra protective netting between the 14 Mark Madden, Madden: Frivolous lawsuit could have been avoided if fan paid closer attention, THE BEAVER ​ ​ ​ COUNTY TIMES (Mar. 14, 2016), ​ http://www.timesonline.com/columnists/sports/mark_madden/madden­frivolous­lawsuit­could­have­been­avoided­if ­fan­paid/article_ef0ed4a2­e95a­11e5­90c9­172f8cc5cb58.html. 15 Id. ​ 16 Id. ​ 17 Video of the incident can bee seen on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syXi7MNNikE. rear ends of both dugouts. In addition, the commissioner has emphasized the need to continue to 18 educate fans on their safety at ballparks. In either case, this unfortunate event brings yet another important reminder to anyone wanting to enjoy America’s pastime — keep your eye on the ball… no matter where you sit.