Jul 8, 2014, 1:00 PM EST
Yesterday we told you about the lawsuit filed by the Yankees fan who was caught snoozing during an April Yankees-Red Sox game. A little while ago, ESPN released as statement about it:
“The comments attributed to ESPN and our announcers were clearly not said in our telecast. The claims presented here are wholly without merit.”
I didn’t watch the game at the time and haven’t seen video of it circulating since — yesterday only still pics of the guy sleeping were floating around — but dude: if no one from ESPN actually said the stuff you said they said in your complaint you’re gonna get your butt handed to you by an angry judge.
But really, even if ESPN is somehow mistaken here and there are some rude comments by their announcers about this guy, who cares? Last I checked, stating the bleeding obvious about a person, however rude it might be, is not actionable.
UPDATE: OK, here’s the video. It’s only 1:14 and it’s possible Kruk and Shulman went back to him later, but they said absolutely nothing anywhere close to over-the-line. The guy seems pretty delusional.
- Hector Olivera’s camp denies any damage to ulnar collateral ligament 3
- UPDATE: Hunter Pence out 6-8 weeks with fracture in left forearm 21
- MLBPA: leaks are from people “who want to see Josh Hamilton hurt personally and professionally” 20
- Suspending Josh Hamilton for a year would be obscene 145
- Report: MLB panel split on rehab for Josh Hamilton; one-year suspension is in play 45
- Joc Pederson goes 2-for-2 in Cactus League debut 6
- Braves scratch Mike Minor from start with more shoulder problems 6
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” 373
- Daniel Murphy on Billy Bean: “I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual” (373)
- Suspending Josh Hamilton for a year would be obscene (145)
- Curt Schilling lowers the boom on some men tweeting threats against his daughter (137)
- That facts of Josh Hamilton’s case should not be a matter of public record (91)
- Billy Bean responds to Daniel Murphy’s comments (90)