No goal
A local former Ball State student who was severely injured back in 2001 when fans pulled down a Ball State football goalpost to celebrate a victory received a legal set back this week. The federal judge hearing his lawsuit against the maker of the post has entered judgment in favor of the maker, finding that the danger of the event was obvious to anyone, and hence the student’s decision to enter into the fray could not bring liability to the maker. The student’s attorney (Scott Montross) said he will appeal the decision to the 7th Circuit, noting to the press that his issue with the maker is that it should have foreseen that people would try to pull the post over, and it should have been design such that it would slowly bend (like they do on TV) instead of suddenly snap (as it did here).
The student had already settled with Ball State for the state maximum ($300,000). The judge, David Hamilton of the Southern District, took a stab at the legislature noting that the state cap for damages against the state or a state body (like Ball State) has not been raised since 1974, reducing the value of a maximum recovery by 75%, in terms of purchasing power. This is especially true where the money is to go towards medical care, as it is here, where costs increases have far outpaced inflation.
July 22nd, 2005 22:34
The cap is being raised under IC 34-13-3-4. For causes of action accruing after 1/1/06 the cap is $500,000. And accruing after 1/1/08 it’s $700,000.
Any idea why Ball State settled for $300k? Seems like that’s the worst they could do - so they might as well try it in an effort to knock the amount down some. Also, since it’s a governmental entity, contributory negligence is a defense; comparative negligence wouldn’t apply. Intentionally pulling the goal posts down would seem to qualify as contributory negligence.