Master Index of Archived Threads


Met fan sues the Mets because a large man fell on her!

SteveJRogers May 07 2007 06:31 PM

[url=http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--metsfaninjured0507may07,0,2295125.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork]NY Mets fan whose back was broken at ballpark files lawsuit[/url] ]NEW YORK -- The New York Mets fan whose back was broken by an apparently drunken 300-pound man who fell on her at Shea Stadium during the team's home opener has filed a lawsuit because of her injuries. Ellen Massey, 58, says in court papers that on April 9 she was in the second row of the right field upper deck near a "visibly intoxicated" man who was "acting in a rowdy, boisterous and dangerous manner for a long period of time." Around 3:30 p.m., court papers say, the man, who has not been found or identified, "in an intoxicated condition fell upon plaintiff causing her to sustain severe personal injuries." Massey's lawyer, Stephen Kaufman, said Monday that the fall by the drunk, who was described as a blond 300-pounder, cracked several of the woman's vertebrae. "He got up and left," apparently uninjured, Kaufman said. "We have information that one of the security people might have spoken to him and let him leave." Two emergency medical technicians sitting directly in front of Massey gave her first aid and comforted her until an ambulance arrived, Kaufman said. Massey underwent surgery for spinal injuries at Jacobi Medical Center and was hospitalized there for about two weeks, Kaufman said. Doctors put rods and screws in her back and will have to operate on her again, he said. Massey was at the game with two adult nephews when the incident occurred between the sixth and seventh innings, with the Mets behind 5-3. The home team went on the beat the Philadelphia Phillies, 11-5. Massey, a Manhattan lawyer, named Sterling Mets L.P., owner of the baseball team; Philadelphia-based Aramark Corp., the beer vendor; the Service Employees International Union Local 177, whose members are security guards at Shea Stadium, and "John Doe," the unidentified man who fell on her, as defendants. Massey's court papers say that Sterling Mets had a duty to provide reasonable safety for stadium patrons, that Aramark should not have sold alcohol to spectators who appeared to be already drunk and that the union employees should have prevented unruly behavior. The lawsuit, filed Friday in Manhattan's state Supreme Court, seeks unspecified money damages for Massey's injuries. The Mets issued a statement about the lawsuit saying, "We believe the claim has no merit." Aramark said it was reviewing the complaint. "We continue to work closely with the Mets and stadium security personnel in investigating this incident," spokeswoman Kristine Grow said. There was no answer at Local 177's headquarters in Brooklyn. In August 2006, a New Jersey appeals court reversed a $105 million verdict against Aramark for selling beer to a drunken man who paralyzed a girl in an auto wreck after a 1999 football game at Giants Stadium. The court ordered a new trial. The three-judge appeals panel said the trial court improperly allowed testimony about the "drinking environment" at the game. The man who caused the accident, Daniel Lanzaro, 34 at the time, is serving a five-year prison term after pleading guilty to vehicular assault. He settled with the family for $200,000 in insurance money to pay his portion of the damages. Lanzaro, who had a blood-alcohol level of 0.226, nearly three times the 0.08 legal limit, testified he bought six beers at halftime although he had already drunk at least six during the first half and was slurring his speech. Not sure why the info on the New Jersey tragedy needs to be mentioned though.

metsmarathon May 07 2007 07:20 PM

relevant precedent

SteveJRogers May 07 2007 07:22 PM

Right. Geez, my journalistic skills are taking a hit today (had a humbling experience earlier at work)

Edgy DC May 07 2007 07:26 PM

Anything that looks bad for Aramark is good for baseball. Wider seats coming at the new stadium.

cooby May 07 2007 09:15 PM

Excellent thread title, Steve, your journalistic skills are still intact!

Elster88 May 07 2007 09:26 PM

lol

Nymr83 May 07 2007 10:01 PM

If they can show that they served beer to an obviously intoxicated man they should be held responsible, but how the heck are you going to prove that? he could easily have gotten someone to buy for him or brought in his own flask. he could also have had 6 beers (not drunk yet) bought 2 at 1 stand, bought 2 at the next stand, bought 2 from a vendor (its a 2 beer limit per purchase if i remember) then consumed the remaining 6 in short order. bottom line, unless they can find the guy how are they going to prove anything? aramark and the mets are going to say "as far as we know a perfectly sober fatso fell on you, thats not our fault, prove otherwise." unless they settle for PR reasons which is of course a possibility.

Edgy DC May 07 2007 11:07 PM

Nymr83 wrote: bottom line, unless they can find the guy how are they going to prove anything? Corraborating testimony from others in that section.

Nymr83 May 07 2007 11:11 PM

who saw him get the beer while looking sloshed already? that'll be a good trick, unless they were with him in which case they know who he is

Edgy DC May 07 2007 11:36 PM

Thanks for the sarcasm. I'll try it. They have these folks called "vendors" who serve you right at your seat.

soupcan May 08 2007 09:29 AM

I agree with Namor. This chick will have a hard time making her case. Unless she and her lawyer have lots of very believable witnesses corroborating, how the hell can they prove anything? 'A big fat guy fell on you, sorry but that's not our fault.'

Nymr83 May 08 2007 01:47 PM

the Mets should make fat people sign a release "i am entirely responsible for any damages i cause as a result of my disgustingly fat body falling on someone, furthermore, in the event of a fire or other disaster, i realize that no effort will be made by rescuers to carry my fat ass out of the stadium on account of their not deserving a hernia, i'm on my own." -signed Fatty Fatso, who should be walking (or rolling) up the ramp to the Upper Deck instead of taking the escalator

Edgy DC May 08 2007 02:03 PM

Perhaps she will have a hard time. But perhaps she does have number of corroborating witnesses. She's a lawyer herself, so she probably has a clue as to how this is done.

attgig May 08 2007 02:07 PM

i'm disappointed at the 2 nephews. at least one of them should've gotten on that guy, and not let him leave, until a cop showed up to do a police report.

soupcan May 08 2007 02:11 PM

Edgy DC wrote: She's a lawyer herself, so she probably has a clue as to how this is done. Assuming that would be your first mistake.

Centerfield May 08 2007 02:12 PM

="metsmarathon"]relevant precedent It's funny. Editor: Find me relevant precedent. Reporter: How about this case from a different jurisdiction with a different set of circumstances? Editor: Perfect!

Edgy DC May 10 2007 10:26 AM

soupcan wrote: ="Edgy DC"]She's a lawyer herself, so she probably has a clue as to how this is done. Assuming that would be your first mistake. Why?

soupcan May 10 2007 10:47 AM

My business is specific to the legal community so I deal with attornies all day, every day. It has been my experience that just because a person has a Juris Doctorate it is no guarantee that they have any idea how the legal system works.

Edgy DC May 10 2007 11:25 AM

I said probably. I didn't say guarantee. My experience is that lawyers tend to have a better clue than internet posters.

soupcan May 10 2007 11:46 AM

My experience is different than yours then.