Skip to content

Dodgers ask court to throw out claims in Bryan Stow case

Feb 3, 2012, 9:30 PM EDT

Giants Fan Attacked AP

The Associated Press reports that the Dodgers asked a U.S. Bankruptcy Judge earlier today to throw out claims against the team filed on behalf of Bryan Stow, the Giants’ fan who was severely beaten outside of Dodger Stadium on Opening Day last year.

Stow and his family originally sued the Dodgers in California, but then filed the claim with the federal court last July after Dodgers’ owner Frank McCourt filed for bankruptcy.

“The Stow claim is, when stripped to its core, based on the faulty premise that a landowner is an insurer of the safety of persons on its property,” the Dodgers said in a 37-page motion filed with U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Kevin Gross.

The Dodgers are arguing that Stow’s representatives “cannot prove any link” between his injuries and any additional security measures that could have been provided. Additionally, the Dodgers assert that they had “no knowledge of any inappropriate conduct” by Stow’s assailants prior to his injuries and thus, shouldn’t be held liable.

The Dodgers are certainly within their rights to make this argument, but as Stow’s lawyer Thomas Girardi mentions, this stance isn’t going to win McCourt any fans in the court of public opinion.

“The only good thing is, he’s out,” said Stow’s lawyer, Thomas Girardi. “Seldom in history has an owner of a team been more hated, despised, than he is for his despicable conduct. So this is just perfect. You wouldn’t expect anything else.”

According to Ken Gurnick of MLB.com, a hearing will be held on the matter on March 7.

  1. ironhawk - Feb 3, 2012 at 9:41 PM

    Dodgers are right. Stow’s family just sees dollar signs. The Dodgers aren’t at fault.

  2. usernamethatdoesnotalreadyexist - Feb 3, 2012 at 10:02 PM

    I’m with you ironhawk. It’s strange to me you have so many “thumbs down.” You people really think this is the Dodgers’ fault? If you have a party, and one of your guests beats the piss out of another guest, would you feel obligated to pay if you had no reason to know it was going to happen? Hell no.

  3. natsattack - Feb 3, 2012 at 10:15 PM

    While I agree the Dodgers are not at fault, I enjoy watching McCourt’s reputation go from worse to much worse… in courts! (pun intended)

  4. cur68 - Feb 3, 2012 at 10:17 PM

    You 2 guys must be new here. These 2 arguments were debunked ages ago. There’s a long history of violent fans at Chavez Ravine. McCourt fired his security chief and never replaced him. There were NO security staff in evidence from multiple images shot by other fans where drunk or aggressive fans were harassing others. Security to prevent fan harassment in the stands or in the parking lot is common in other large venues (might even be a law: one of the California lawyers that frequent this site can confirm that). Hell, its common in bars: those guys are called bouncers. They served alcohol to thousands of already rowdy fans and didn’t do much of anything to ensure fan safety.

    • Utley's Hair - Feb 4, 2012 at 3:46 PM

      I’m just glad the Super Bowl is tomorrow night. Maybe these PFT hacks will head back over there.

  5. ireportyoudecide - Feb 3, 2012 at 11:04 PM

    Dodger Stadium not being the safe isn’t the Dodgers fault, it’s the loser fans they have that go there. If you get car jacked at Wal-Mart are you going to sue Wal-Mart? Apparantly judging from the thumbs down on the first post some of you would.

    • koufaxmitzvah - Feb 4, 2012 at 7:53 AM

      Is there bad lighting in the Wal-Mart parking lot that made the car jacking easier to accomplish? Have there been previous violent incidents in this Wal-Mart parking lot which the managers ignored after numerous complaints? Did the car jackers buy their gun and bullets inside the Wal-Mart and then immediately went outsdie to conduct the crime?

      It’s okay. You’re just not real bright. And you’re not a lawyer. Which makes sense to me why nothing makes sense to you.

      • ireportyoudecide - Feb 4, 2012 at 11:41 AM

        Sure, and it’s McDonalds fault that the coffee wat to hot. I just clicked on your name, you call yourself a leftwingzionist, now I understand why I agree with 0% of what you say.

      • badmamainphilliesjamas - Feb 4, 2012 at 12:44 PM

        @ireport – actually, it was McDonald’s fault. Watch the movie, _Hot Coffee._

    • yahmule - Feb 11, 2012 at 12:30 PM

      McDonalds was clearly at fault in that incident as reflected by the court ruling and their own actions in the aftermath of the decision. They could have also avoided lots of hassle and expense by acting like human beings when first contacted by the injured woman’s representatives. Instead, they acted with their customary arrogance and it cost them…about the amount of money they make selling coffee for one morning.

  6. supersnappy - Feb 3, 2012 at 11:28 PM

    Nobody is arguing that the Dodgers should have a bodyguard for every fan, just like nobody is claiming the Dodgers should have no security at all. I don’t know the American terminology, but way up here we refer to a host’s Duty of Care. The Dodgers would be expected to take every reasonable precaution to ensure the safety of their guests. If they were aware of a potential problem and did not take steps to correct it they may be liable for some damages.
    I don’t think the Stow family is greedy, and I don’t necessarily think the Dodgers are heartless and cheap. This is why these things go to court; its not always so easy to tell.
    For Brian Stow’s sake I hope he gets some help his bills etc.

  7. nflinla - Feb 3, 2012 at 11:41 PM

    The Dodgers shouldn’t have to pay the Stow family anything. No disrespect to Bryan Stow but the Dodgers aren’t at fault here.

    • crisisjunky - Feb 4, 2012 at 12:26 AM

      YES, The Dodgers SHOULD pay The Stows’ bills and any other franchise would.
      This is a decency / P.R. save issue, regardless of culpability, and only Frank McCourt’s
      physical incapacity for being inconvenienced has prevented it so far.
      I would be amazed if, as soon as the gavel comes down, that the first outlay of cash
      New Money hands out is to Stow Representation.
      It will simply be good business, something current Dodge Management doesn’t concern itself
      with, not to mention common decent fan friendliness toward the national baseball community.

      • Old Gator - Feb 4, 2012 at 10:52 AM

        Compare the Dodgers’ reaction to the Stowe episode with the Rangers’ response when their fan fell over the railing and died. A study in class versus classlessness.

  8. crisisjunky - Feb 4, 2012 at 12:31 AM

    Well, o.k., maybe not Loria, and maybe not Glass, (though your car is probably safer at my Wal-Mart, than my car is at Chavez)

  9. sisqsage - Feb 4, 2012 at 6:02 AM

    Walmart gets sued all of the time. Ask Walmart. Always.

  10. bleed4philly - Feb 4, 2012 at 11:17 AM

    McCourt doesn’t want the value of the team to drop.

  11. yahmule - Feb 11, 2012 at 12:23 PM

    The Dodgers obviously share blame for not providing adequate security. All the people commenting otherwise would feel much differently is they had been in a similar position to the unfornate Mr Stow.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Teams searching for trade deadline impact
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Street (3942)
  2. C. Lee (2892)
  3. H. Ramirez (2811)
  4. T. Tulowitzki (2765)
  5. Y. Puig (2659)
  1. C. Headley (2634)
  2. B. Belt (2465)
  3. J. Soria (2309)
  4. T. Walker (2198)
  5. A. Rios (2119)