Expanding the netting

[bmfc1]

The first time I sat behind the netting, it was distracting for a few innings and then I didn't notice. If someone says that it blocks their view, they can move upstairs.

Every game that the MFYs don't extend the netting is another day that they are putting their fans at risk. The little girl's family should be able to get Otani $ from the MFYs because the MFYs knew of the risk and failed to act. The MFYs will say that the family contributed to the negligence by sitting there despite the absence of the netting. However, even the Court agrees, in NY (unlike, e.g., Maryland) Plaintiff’s damages will be reduced by their own liability, but not barred completely. NY CPLR § 1411 (2012).

[batmagadanleadoff]

bmfc1 wrote: The first time I sat behind the netting, it was distracting for a few innings and then I didn't notice. If someone says that it blocks their view, they can move upstairs.

Agree. Same experience. After a short while, it's as if the netting's not even there.

bmfc1 wrote: The little girl's family should be able to get Otani $ from the MFYs because the MFYs knew of the risk and failed to act. The MFYs will say that the family contributed to the negligence by sitting there despite the absence of the netting. However, even the Court agrees, in NY (unlike, e.g., Maryland) Plaintiff’s damages will be reduced by their own liability, but not barred completely. NY CPLR § 1411 (2012).

Despite CPLR § 1411, the assumption of the risk defense will likely bar the entire claim.

https://www.leagle.com/decision/2002767300ad2d4671246

http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2005/2005_01696.htm

[Guest d'Kong76]

I can't afford major league netting but I've experienced minor league netting
and didn't find it distracting or really even think about it being there.

[Gwreck]

But why should the majority of field level seats be off-limits to those people?

They're not, of course. The vast majority of field level seats have a minuscule risk of getting hit by a line drive hit into the stands no matter what your age, size, disability status, or other physical/mental characteristics are.

Rare, but foreseeable. The acceptable number of children injured at baseball games is zero. There should be no kids who go to a game and get struck by line drives.

There are any number of ways a child can get injured at a baseball game. Or if they're riding in a car. Or if they go to school. It's impossible to suggest that no one should ever be injured at at baseball game. People - yes, including children - are going to get injured from time to time. I guess you could put everyone behind plexiglass for the entire game; that might do the trick if you really think that no one should ever be struck by a line drive.

I strongly disagree that netting is not a distraction or something that one gets used to after a few innings.

I don't want to sound heartless but I find the sudden urge to have tons of extra protective netting to be a giant overreaction.

[bmfc1]

Thanks batmagadanleadoff. I hate to think that just showing up and holding a ticket that says "you're assuming all liability" gives a team carte blanche to ignore any safety concerns. Perhaps a difference with those cases is that the MFYs have affirmatively chosen not to extend the netting while other teams did so.