Contact the personal injury attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today. We can help you get the just compensation you deserve for your injuries or those of a loved one. For a free initial consultation, call 203-221-3100 or email JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

In the case of Zides v. Quinnipiac University, an injured student and his parents sued a University’s athletic director for injuries suffered while he was pitching batting practice. The student claimed that the injuries were the result of the University’s negligence and recklessness. In law, negligence is the failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another. In order to succeed in this claim, the mother must prove that (1) the University owed a duty of care to the student athlete, (2) the University breached that duty and, (3) the breach of duty was a direct cause of the student athlete’s (4) real and compensable injury. Recklessness alleges that the University knew, or should have known, that their actions would likely cause harm.

The student was injured while pitching for batting practice. The pitcher’s mound is 60 feet from home plate. A person pitching to give players batting practice is located on 45 feet away from home plate. In batting practice, pitches are meant to be hit. To protect the pitcher, a safety device is needed. An L-screen, an L-shpaed screen, placed between the pitcher and home plate, is meant to provide this protection. Allegedly, the screen had been damages, was worn and cut, and had been improperly repaired. It is further claimed that this screen had gaps and was help together by zip-tie fasteners, which would break when hit by balls hit by the batters. In response to these allegations, the University and its athletic director moved for summary judgment.

The court granted the University’s motion for the student’s negligence claim against the University. There was no testimony that indicated the University’s Athletic Director knew of defects in the L-screen’s actual condition on the date of the accident or before. Weekly meetings were held between the director and coaches, but no indications of such defects were brought to his attention. “Given [the director’s] background, it would is difficult to understand how failure to issue directive and rules to a particular coach could be reckless” said the court. “It would seem to the court at least that n athletic director should be able to rely on an experience coach taking common sense measures to protect athletes from harm due to defective equipment and any claim of unreasonableness."

At Maya Murphy, P.C., our personal injury attorneys are dedicated to achieving the best results for individuals and their family members and loved ones whose daily lives have been disrupted by injury, whether caused by a motor vehicle or pedestrian accident, a slip and fall, medical malpractice, a defective product, or otherwise. Our attorneys are not afraid to aggressively pursue and litigate cases and have extensive experience litigating personal injury matters in both state and federal courts, and always with regard to the unique circumstances of our client and the injury he or she has sustained. 

Please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 203-221-3100, or at JMaya@mayalaw.com, to schedule a free consultation.

Source: Zides v. Quinnipiac Univ., 2006 Conn. Super. LEXIS 473 (Conn. Super. Ct. Feb. 7, 2006)