No liability when hit in face with balls-- and other things that civil litigators find interesting
(Civil Cases decided by N.C. Court of Appeals 7/17/2012)
Defendant hit by a wild pitch by pitcher warming up in bull pen. The Court follows a line of cases that says safe areas covered by screening only necessary where the danger is greatest (i.e. behind home plate). No duty of care exists if someone is injured in an unusual way by a thrown or batted ball. In the end, baseball is still boring, but at least there’s the chance to see someone hit by a ball.
An executor of an estate does not have standing to appeal case as he is not an aggrieved party. Only the beneficiaries have standing to do so. It seems, though, that an executor can spend the estate's money filing an appeal that they should have known they never had standing to file.
Court affirms the principle that County inspections are in place to annoy, but not to protect after stating that Wake County is immune from suits for negligent inspections.
Employment contract which requires arbitration for any disputes concerning termination of employment must go to arbitration and stay any court proceeding about that issue. A case that teaches us, that if one is verbose in explaining something obvious, then we may overlook its obviousness.
The Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children requires that when placing a child outside of the state, following a finding that a juvenile is abused, neglected, or dependent, the receiving state must first decide whether the placement is in the best interest of the child. In this case, South Carolina stated that the placement was inappropriate due to the proposed placement’s history with Child Protective Services. The trial court appeared to ignore this and did it anyway. Our Court of Appeals did not approve.
Assistant principal acts inappropriately around female teachers following a bout with colorectal cancer. He wasn’t present during his dismissal hearing due to a scheduling issue. Court of Appeals reviews the record and sees no issue with the board’s decision.
In which the Court of Appeals reminds me why I do not now, nor do I ever intend to practice Workers Compensation law.