Hitting cars as they drive by a softball field. Who's liable?

[BuckeyeGuy]

What is described is far from ordinary care and borders on reckless. Ordinary care requires that when your actions or conditions prove to present a hazard, it is incumbent upon you to modify your behavior.

Definition of ORDINARY CARE. : the care that an average reasonable man exercises to prevent harm to the person or property of others and failure to exercise which when under a duty to do so constitutes actionable negligence on the part of one causing such harm.

That's one definition. There's also Duty of care, n. a requirement that a person act toward others and the public with watchfulness, attention, caution and prudence that a reasonable person in the circumstances would.

The legal test is the "reasonable" part: a reasonable person can see that a baseball/softball diamond being used properly will have balls leaving the playing field. There's nothing unreasonable or reckless about playing ball, sorry.

 

[riseball]

That's one definition. There's also Duty of care, n. a requirement that a person act toward others and the public with watchfulness, attention, caution and prudence that a reasonable person in the circumstances would.

The legal test is the "reasonable" part: a reasonable person can see that a baseball/softball diamond being used properly will have balls leaving the playing field. There's nothing unreasonable or reckless about playing ball, sorry.

Go back and read ALL of the OP's comments carefully. If you can rationalize that as reasonable behavior you must have very low standards.

 

[Cannonball]

I was always told that a baseball/softball diamond known in a community and with proper precautions such as fence height etc. are known hazards and so, good luck with a lawsuit. However, I am not a lawyer.

 

[riseball]

I was always told that a baseball/softball diamond known in a community and with proper precautions such as fence height etc. are known hazards and so, good luck with a lawsuit. However, I am not a lawyer.

Would it be accceptable for some guys to practice slowpitch on a fast pitch field knowing full well that there was a high likelihood that that ball will exit the park and hit a vehicle? If BB and some of her former teammates went to a field with cars or people walking by on the other side of the fence, would you agree to do soft toss for their home run derby and feel no sense of responsibility for damage or injury? What the OP described was not a game or typical practice. They were doing front toss trying to get as many balls over the fence as possible. No responsibility for their actions whatsoever?

 

[Cannonball]

If you are talking slow pitch on a fastpitch diamond then that doesn't fit the expectations of the diamond. A slowpitch diamond is expected to be 300+ feet. This was a girl on a fastpitch diamond. The expectation is that she would practice hitting balls to the best of her ability. Again, not a lawyer. I was walking alongside a diamond last month. I caught a ball in the face. Never saw it coming. It broke my glasses, lacerated my nose and face. In short, I was messed up. I just got my new glasses at a pretty big expense. Never thought of suing since I assumed the risk at a ball diamond.

Take my legal opinion to a lawyer along with roughly $200/hour and you'll get an answer to the OP. LOL

Edited to add:

http://injury-law.freeadvice.com/injury-law/property_damage/damage-to-car-from-base-ball.htm

http://carinsurance.about.com/od/ComprehensiveClaims/a/A-Ball-Hit-My-Car-Who-Pays.htm

 

[YOCOACH]

Sorry...although I agree with most of this and schools are considered public property, I'd have to say no that you're not liable on this one. Mind you, I'm not a lawyer, but I would think that the school's liability insurance would have to cover this whether you were there or not since the driver assumes the risk when they are traveling that "road/driveway." A case could be made either way but what it really comes down to is how good the lawyers are.

 

[BuckeyeGuy]

Go back and read ALL of the OP's comments carefully. If you can rationalize that as reasonable behavior you must have very low standards.

Went back and read them all. There is nothing that I see that indicates they are using the field improperly, nor are they intending to do damage.

The question is: where does the liability land? My 1st post addresses this, and it's pretty simple:

1) Are they using the facility in the manner for which it was designed? Yes - playing softball on a softball diamond.
2) Have they intentionally misused the facility? No - batting from the batter's box, hitting into fair territory, or away from the backstop anyway.
3) Are they intending to do harm/damage to passing cars? No - trying to hit the ball hard is not intent to hit a passing vehicle.
4) Based on the above, are they liable for damage caused by a ball hit over the fence? Probably not.

Are you really saying it's not reasonable behavior to hit a ball over the fence at a softball diamond? That's ridiculous. Just because they know it's possible for damage to occur does not make them liable for that damage.

You're trying to apply common sense to the law, and that usually doesn't work, at least in my experience.

 

[riseball]

Went back and read them all. There is nothing that I see that indicates they are using the field improperly, nor are they intending to do damage.

The question is: where does the liability land? My 1st post addresses this, and it's pretty simple:

1) Are they using the facility in the manner for which it was designed? Yes - playing softball on a softball diamond.
2) Have they intentionally misused the facility? No - batting from the batter's box, hitting into fair territory, or away from the backstop anyway.
3) Are they intending to do harm/damage to passing cars? No - trying to hit the ball hard is not intent to hit a passing vehicle.
4) Based on the above, are they liable for damage caused by a ball hit over the fence? Probably not.

Are you really saying it's not reasonable behavior to hit a ball over the fence at a softball diamond? That's ridiculous. Just because they know it's possible for damage to occur does not make them liable for that damage.

You're trying to apply common sense to the law, and that usually doesn't work, at least in my experience.

So based on your logic it would be perfectly fine for my 18u team to do front toss at a local field where literally dozens of balls would land in the parking lot causing thousands of dollars in damage and you would see nothing wrong with that behavior? After all we are just playing softball!