Jun 25, 2014, 9:45 AM EST
You may recall that a Kansas man sued the Kansas City Royals, alleging that a hot dog thrown by the team’s mascot — Sluggerrr — at a September 2009 game struck him in the eye and detached his retina. The case went to trial in 2011 and the Royals — and Sluggerr — won. The plaintiff appealed. In early 2013 he won his appeal. The Royals appealed it to the Missouri Supreme Court.
Yesterday, the supreme court ruled in favor of the fan again, throwing out the jury verdict for the last time and sending the case back for a re-trial.
Again: a case involving a guy in a lion suit throwing a hot dog at a guy is likely to enter its sixth year soon. And, I assume, a fact pattern involving a mascot throwing concessions at fans at a sporting event is also entering its sixth year as a fact pattern on first year torts exams in law schools around the country.
- THE YEAR IN REVIEW: HBT’s most commented-upon stories of the year 64
- The Yankees are treating Alex Rodriguez differently than they treated Derek Jeter. So what? 32
- Braves sign setup man Jason Grilli to two-year contract 13
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot 119
- Phil Hughes signs a three-year extension with the Twins 27
- The Padres have talked to the Phillies about Cole Hamels 23
- Why is John Smoltz a shoo-in for the Hall of Fame? 63
- Phillies GM told Ryan Howard they’d be better off “not with him but without him” 85
- Bud Selig will get a $6 million a year pension. Which is obscene. (145)
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot (119)
- Today’s specious anti-Mike Piazza-for-the-Hall-Fame argument (93)
- St. Petersburg City Council votes down deal to allow Rays to look for new stadium site (90)
- Phillies GM told Ryan Howard they’d be better off “not with him but without him” (85)