An ongoing NFL lawsuit that currently includes approximately 2,138 current and former players, an N.C.A.A. lawsuit that involves collegiate players of lacrosse, football, hockey and soccer. Whether an accidental occurance or a career ending blow, players of the game everywhere are being sure to collect their fair share of compensation and news headlines. As awareness of injuries, such as concussions, increases, injuries to players in the 70's and 80's are resurfacing and adding to the thousands of lawsuits against various leagues, including the NFL, NHL, NCAA and high school sport leagues.
In the situation of Mike O'Malley, the attorney representing him may have a good case against his coach or university. His attorney could argue that Mike's coach, or the NCAA failed to act accordingly to a known situation that was causing harm to other participants. For example, in Illinois, two former college football players have filed a lawsuit against the NCAA alleging that "the NCAA was aware or should have been aware of that fact that football coaches taught players to hit and tackle with their helmets," (Unknown, 2012). Failing to address the issue lead to serious and extensive injuries of various players in the league. Mike's attorney could also place negligence on the defendant. In the case of negligence, his attorney would need to prove that "the defendant had a duty to the plaintiff, the defendant breached that duty by failing to conform to the required standard of conduct, and the defendants negligence was the result of harm to the plaintiff," (Burton, 2007). The coach's failure to address the injury Mike received or to immediately administer care lead to further exertion of the injury and severe damage to Mike's knee. The possible financial burden being placed on the O'Malley family could also be a positive argument for the plaintiff. If Mike's injury lead to the removal of his scholarship, his family will be placed with the burden of tuition and medical expenses (Cassilo, 2011). The 1,000s of additional dollars required of the family would put them under severe financial strain.
John Hochfelder, a personal injury lawyer for approximately 30 years, claims otherwise, "Personal injury lawyers are often asked, 'Can I sue?' I always answer 'Yes, of course,' but the real answer is whether the inquiring plaintiff will win, and in school sports injury lawsuits, the answer is almost always, 'No way,'" (Popke, 2010). The biggest argument of the attorney representing the coach or university would be the Assumption of Risk Doctrine. This happens when a participant is "willfully participating in an activity that the injured person knew was dangerous" (Goguen, 2012). The harm suffered must closely relate tot he risk that is inherent towards the activity. For example, head trauma, jarring, and tackling in football. When deciding to participate in the activity, the individual is aware of the risk and consequences associated with the activity. In situations such as this, the coach is not at fault for the injury to the player. In personal injury cases involving injured athletes, it is often difficult to prove negligence on behalf of a coach or university. In some situations, prior precedence may have been established in favor of the defendant. In others, state or federal statues may protect schools or their employees. For example, in 2009 the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that Brittany Noffke could not sue her cheerleading coach for an alleged lack of supervision. Brittany fell from the top of a formation during cheerleading practice, however, cheerleading is covered by the states recreational immunity statute. This statute "limits a schools liability for an injury sustained by a participant engaging in an athletic or recreational activity on school grounds" (Popke, 2010).
In many cases, rules have already been established that restrict a coach's behavior. For example, the area they can occupy while on the field or court and the worlds or action they use during a game. Most coaches have a sense of responsibility towards their players and act accordingly in a situation such as an injury. An option to preventing an injured player from continuing to play and overruling a coach's decision could be the decision of the referee or umpire. While some coaches seek victory at all necessary costs, many more respect the right of their players and will make the right decision when faced with such a situation.
Many professional athletes have clauses in their contracts that regard payment when injured. In general, these clauses have been included in order to dissuade the athlete from suing the league or owner/coach of the team. This works much like workers compensation. The worker/athlete is paid in order to prevent further escalation of the situation and additional expenses to themselves and their company/team. Athletes are working to make an income, just like other working citizens. Their families may be dependent upon that income. However, when an athletes contract expires, so do the incoming checks. They lose the benefits and source of income and can many times be left with a financial burden.
Burton, W. C. (2007). The free dictionary. In Retrieved from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/negligence
Cassilo, D. (2011). Daily caller. In Retrieved from http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/09/for-college-scholarship-athletes-injury-can-spell-financial-disaster/
Goguen, D. (2012). Nolo law for all. Retrieved from http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defenses-personal-injury-cases-32276.html
Popke, M. (2010, July). Athletic business. Retrieved from http://www.athleticbusiness.com/articles/article.aspx?articleid=3584&zoneid=28
Unknown. (2012). Scarlett law group. Retrieved from http://www.scarlettlawgroup.com/former-college-football-players-who-suffered-traumatic-brain-injuries-file-lawsuit-against-ncaa.html
Subject: College Sport Injuries 
Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:04 am
