“The most plausible route to the death of football…”

by Walter Olson on February 13, 2012

“…starts with liability suits.” As concussion suits mount, will broadcast networks and high school referees need to worry about being named as defendants along with team franchises, schools, helmet manufacturers and other more obvious defendants? [Tyler Cowen and Kevin Grier, Grantland, via Ilya Somin] More: Miller (“I think these cases are going nowhere.”)

{ 4 comments }

1 DEM 02.13.12 at 9:39 am

Other than through a transparently results-oriented and football-hostile judge, how would such a suit get past an assumption of the risk defense? Football is a dangerous sport and everyone knows it. Is it even possible for a plaintiff to establish that he (or his family) understood that a football helmet would prevent all concussions? They plainly do not do so, have never have done so, and probably never will do so.

2 Melvin H. 02.14.12 at 12:07 am

On top of that, if this somehow gets through, how long before players from the NBA, NHL, MLB, soccer, auto racing, and wrestling (both amateur and WWE/TNA style)–along with who knows how many other sports–would haul the leagues (and others) in under the same premise?

3 Melvin H. 02.15.12 at 1:13 am

Or, let the insanity known as Title IX take over high-school sports.

4 David Schwartz 02.15.12 at 5:04 am

Actually, liability suits messing with professional Football in the United States may be the most plausible route to tort reform.

Comments on this entry are closed.