Skip to content

Woman hit by ball sues Little Leaguer for $500,000

Jun 22, 2012, 2:51 PM EDT

Little League logo

Two years and more than $150,000 in medical costs later, a New Jersey woman is suing a Little Leaguer who threw a ball and struck her in the face.

Elizabeth Lloyd was sitting at a picnic table near a fenced-in bullpen when she was hit with the ball. Catcher Matthew Migliaccio, 11 years old at the time, made the throw while warming up a pitcher.

Here’s the AP account:

The lawsuit filed April 24 alleges Migliaccio’s errant throw was intentional and reckless, “assaulted and battered” Lloyd and caused “severe, painful and permanent” injuries.

A second count alleges Migliaccio’s actions were negligent and careless through “engaging in inappropriate physical and/or sporting activity” near Lloyd. She continues to suffer pain and anguish, incur medical expenses and has been unable to carry out her usual duties and activities, the lawsuit says.

And Lloyd’s husband, in a third count, is suing for the loss of “services, society and consortium” of his wife. They’ve demanded a jury trial.

In all, the Lloyd family is seeking $500,000 in damages.

According to the lawyer for the Migliaccio family, Anthony Pagano, the count alleging negligence and carelessness is covered by homeowner’s insurance but the other counts are not. Little League has denied any coverage.

Migliaccio’s father denied that the overthrown ball was intentional.

“It’s absurd to expect every 11-year-old to throw the ball on target,” Migliaccio said. “Everyone knows you’ve got to watch out. You assume some risk when you go out to a field. That’s just part of being at a game.”

No courtdate has been set for the suit.

  1. Stacey - Jun 22, 2012 at 2:55 PM

    I hate people.

    • kopy - Jun 22, 2012 at 2:56 PM

      Great minds.

    • pharmerbrown - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:04 PM

      I say we all show up at the courthouse (I’m in NJ, and could allow a few dozen to camp out in my back yard the night before) and pelt her and her lawyer with baseballs as they climb the steps. We can call it a flash mob (or a lesson, whichever is more convenient).

      Truth be told, I have to blame the lawyer on this one. Yeah, she’s obviously alright with being along for the ride… but no one can rack up medical bills faster than a PI lawyer who thinks they have a case. Spending someone else’s money in the hopes of increasing the settlement only benefits the lawyer.

      • kopy - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:21 PM

        I can’t recall the source, but I once heard/read that 95% of the world’s lawyers are in the United States. It makes my skin crawl. I hope it’s not true, though it probably is.

  2. kopy - Jun 22, 2012 at 2:56 PM

    This is why I hate people.

  3. paulhargis53 - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:00 PM

    What a frivolous, redonkulous lawsuit.
    I’m beginning to detest my fellow human beings as a species. No one wants to work for anything, everyone is looking for the quick buck or the free ride.
    Douchebaggery at its finest.
    Ugh.

  4. amunoz78 - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:05 PM

    Is this the same lady that sued McDonald’s because they serve hot coffee?

    Seriously, lady, you’re suing an 11 year old?!?!? Have you said that out-loud? “I’m suing an 11 year old.” Yeah, it’s as ridiculous as it sounds…

    • kopy - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:08 PM

      I don’t want to hijack this thread, but it’s been established that the hot coffee lawsuit had legs.

      McDonald’s knew they were serving it at a temperature that was too hot (even for coffee), it gave her really bad burns on her legs (nobody should be serving anyone anything at that temperature), the lid wasn’t secured, etc.

      The lawsuit seems frivolous on the surface, and I don’t know as much about it as others, but there was definitely some reckless negligence.

      • HitsDingers - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:01 PM

        Similarly hoping not to hijack the thread, funny note: reason why McDs served the coffee so hot? Free refills.
        Really hot coffee = wait longer to drink it = fewer refills

      • kopy - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:11 PM

        I’ve also heard that, the hotter at which you brew, the more you can get out of less beans. But I don’t know if there’s any truth to that.

      • stlouis1baseball - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:57 PM

        Yes Kopy. We have established the lawsuit having merit.
        Yet…I still think it is rediculous.

      • Kevin S. - Jun 22, 2012 at 6:46 PM

        Coffee should be brewed at 190-200 degrees and served at about 170 degrees. It does need to be hot, but what McDonalds kept it at was ridiculous.

      • raysfan1 - Jun 22, 2012 at 8:25 PM

        The big issue with the McDonald’s case was the $2.7M punitive damages awarded. Certainly actual damages for third degree burns was at least potentially merited.

  5. 4d3fect - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:07 PM

    *Farnsworth voice*

    “I don’t want to live on this planet anymore”

  6. elmaquino - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:09 PM

    You are a special human being, lady.

  7. alexb64 - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:09 PM

    I’m guessing the poor judge that gets this case will really wish he had the ability to shoot lightning bolts out his hands at these two cash grabbing a-holes.

  8. hockeyflow33 - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:10 PM

    A quick look shows that the statute of limitations for a personal injury case in new jersey is two years. Hopefully this can be dismissed immediately.

    • garylanglais - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:27 PM

      It happened in May 2010 (according to this article) and the Complaint was filed on April 24th. So it’s good. Typical for personal injury cases to file close to statute of limitations to allow the medical process to run its course

      http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/06/nj_woman_hit_in_face_by_ball_a.html

  9. The Dangerous Mabry - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:12 PM

    If someone sued me when I was 11, and got everything I owned, it would have been about $2.30 and a Castle Grayskull playset, with a couple of He-Man action figures. I’d have fought her over the battle-damage Skeletor, but otherwise, I think I’d have been ok with the situation.

    I’m not sure where $500,000 is supposed to come from.

    • elmaquino - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:16 PM

      his parents

    • joshfrancis50 - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:39 PM

      That Castle Grayskull playset was bitchin. I would have had trouble parting with Man-E-Faces.

  10. bcjim - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:15 PM

    Lol, good luck. Actually, bad luck, is what I wish her, I mean I’m sorry she got injured, but really? I didn’t even know you could sue a minor.

  11. girardisbraces - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:17 PM

    I’m so enraged by this I could spit bullets. Someone needs to raise some money for this kid and his parents to defend against this asinine lawsuit.

  12. shanabartels - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:19 PM

    It’s too bad Calcaterra is off this week. “Loss of consortium” is pretty hilarious. Back in 2008 when my then-boyfriend got hit by a cab while crossing the street (he got tossed in the air and landed on his face, so his nose was broken but luckily that was his only injury other than some scrapes and bruises), he jokingly said we should try to make a case for loss of consortium. We didn’t bother, though, because neither of us gets litigious as a hobby. Even though the cab driver fled the scene, it wouldn’t have been a strong case.

    • Kevin S. - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:29 PM

      Out of curiosity, how is hit-and-run not a strong case?

      • Tim's Neighbor - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:57 PM

        I imagine that the loss of consortium portion would have been the challenging part to sue for.

      • Old Gator - Jun 22, 2012 at 6:47 PM

        I’m wondering what she did to him with her face for which he lost consortium. I can’t ever remember any of my women involving their teeth.

      • shanabartels - Jun 25, 2012 at 2:20 PM

        Sorry I didn’t see your response earlier. I vaguely recall that we discussed the situation with my uncle and at least one other lawyer, and they told us that pursuing it wouldn’t yield anything productive.

  13. natsattack - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:26 PM

    I hope they lose and have to pay the kid’s family the $500,000. I’m 2 years removed from being an 11 year old Little League catcher (now in Babe Ruth), and I hit people in the stands twice on errant throws to third, one in the arm, one in the leg, and have missed on other occasions. Those people understood it’s part of the game, I apologized, and everybody moved on, I’m actually a good friend of one of the “victims.” I challenge these nitwits to throw a baseball within 10 feet of a target 60 feet away, 100 times in a row. Random variation occurs, and errant throws are part of playing baseball. Even the baseball players who are the best of the best can’t throw it accurately all the time, anyone who watches baseball have seen throws go above the firstbaseman’s glove and into the stands.

    • seeinred87 - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:50 PM

      If you’re 13 years old, I have some newfound faith in our education system.

      I read your post approximately 25 times to make sure that’s what you’re saying.

      • bigtunany - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:01 PM

        Exactly! The post is spot on, but this would make for a spooky 13 year old.

    • CJ - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:02 PM

      you have to be one of the most well spoken Nats fans–er, I mean, 13 year olds–on the planet if you can write like that.

      • madhatternalice - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:16 PM

        S/he must go to school in Montgomery County :)

    • hopelessinseattle - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:21 PM

      Dude,

      If you are catching and you threw a ball into the stands while trying to throw to 3rd base……..well that’s bad…..as for the rest of your post, I tend to agree.

      • The Dangerous Mabry - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:48 PM

        Not usually a lot of foul territory on little league fields. A hard throw to third that’s on the foul side of the bag can pretty easily carry into the bleachers.

      • seeinred87 - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:54 PM

        If anything, I think it means he’s got a cannon.

        A bunt down the 1st base line or a wild pitch or something that bounces toward the 1st base dugout creates an angle where an overthrow could easily sail into the stands on the 3rd base side.

        But I mean a throw from behind the plate trying to nab a guy stealing 3rd doing that would be kind of strange, yeah.

    • stlouis1baseball - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:59 PM

      Spot on Natsattack! Well done young Man!

  14. aclassyguyfromaclassytown - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:31 PM

    Whether or not the ball that hit her in the face that time was intentional, I bet the next time she gets hit in the face by a baseball thrown by some kid it will have been. Suing a little leaguer. You might be better off being know by the local kids as the person who killed Santa Clause.

  15. Kevin S. - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:31 PM

    Let me echo Stacey and kopy – people suck.

    Also, doesn’t Little League have a similar assumed liability to MLB ballparks? Pay attention to what’s going on you stupid fucktwit.

    • beanster71 - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:46 PM

      “Pay attention to what’s going on you stupid fucktwit.”

      I usually find that profanity in the comments is unnecessary (or worse), but in this case, you’re f*cking spot on!

  16. zidanevalor - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:36 PM

    I’m way more interested to know how $150K in medical costs were spent. Did this woman need complete facial reconstructive surgery?

  17. mydadyourmom - Jun 22, 2012 at 3:48 PM

    Kid must have a cannon to have mashed her face up and ruined her life. Fackin blitch.

  18. broncobrewer - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:03 PM

    When I played baseball, in new jersey, in the ’80s and ’90s all the fields had signs saying watch out for flying balls and bats. Also park car here at own risk. Wouldnt that mean you have to pay attention? Maybe have a glove?
    I agree with the father MLB players have bad throws every once in a while an 11 y/o will too

  19. sleepyirv - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:04 PM

    It’s important remember that only these types of stories reach the national level. Most people shrug their shoulders, curse their bad luck, and go on with their lives.

  20. ltzep75 - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:07 PM

    I hope the judge sanctions the lady for bringing a fivolous suit. To do a little Calcaterra impression (…shaves head, gets glasses, gains a few lbs…):

    A judge can sanction a party at any time during suit if he or she determins that the party brought suit, inter alia, with no reasonable basis in law or equity and can not be supported by a good faith argument for an extension/modification/reversal of then existing law. Further a claim will be deemed frivolous or groundless when no rational argument can be advanced in its support, when it is not supported by any credible evidence, when a reasonable person could not have expected its success, or when it is completely untenable.

    I think here that a counsel could argue that it’s completely irrational to believe that an 11 y/o would do perfectly what big leaguers have issues with when getting a case of the yips.

    (add some trolling to phillies fans…Calcaterra impression over).

    What just happened there? I think I blacked out.

  21. bdickey33 - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:08 PM

    The last 3 or four comments in here are hilarious!

  22. homelanddefense - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:15 PM

    In high school I hit a fan standing behind the third base fence with a throw from right field. Knocked hit out, no lawsuit filed. People need to man up in this country instead of looking for the easy payday.

  23. churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:15 PM

    Obviously not a lawyer, but can an 11 year old even legally form intent or be considered reckless?

    • ftbramwell - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:31 PM

      Yes. The interesting thing is whether the events of this case occurred in a jurisdiction where the parent is liable for the torts of the child. If the events did not such a jurisdiction, and assuming that he’s judgment proof like most eleven year olds, little Timmy should agree to have judgment taken out against him, then immediately file bankruptcy. Sure, his credit will be ruined for seven years, but he’s not going to need credit for six or seven years. Everybody wins, except for the plaintiff who is obviously too dumb to realize that she needs to keep her eye on the ball.

    • Detroit Michael - Jun 22, 2012 at 5:16 PM

      Also, how can an action be both intentional and reckless? Intentional or reckless, I can understand.

  24. paulhargis53 - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:20 PM

    Captain Trips needs to happen.

    Read The Stand if you don’t get my reference.

  25. buffalomafia - Jun 22, 2012 at 4:38 PM

    Why is husband sueing cause his wife can’t give him a bj anymore?

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Can Angels recoup loss of Richards?
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. R. Castillo (4785)
  2. M. Cuddyer (2500)
  3. K. Bryant (2308)
  4. W. Myers (1969)
  5. G. Richards (1969)
  1. H. Ramirez (1912)
  2. D. Ortiz (1885)
  3. A. Cashner (1811)
  4. J. Hamilton (1794)
  5. A. McCutchen (1766)