For you lawyers out there (COVID football opening related)

[99gator]

One of the things I don’t understand is the issue of these universities being worried about liability.

1. The problem would seem to be that you have to prove where they got the virus, which I would think is impossible.

That’s why I don’t get the liability thing.

How the heck do you prove where, when and how the virus was acquired so as to claim that the school (or whomever) is responsible.

but....

2. You’d have to prove “damages” somehow. So, I don’t know what you could get awarded if you never even displayed symptoms or that you were never hospitalized or that you never had to pay for any of the medical care you received. You didn’t miss work, so you don’t have lost wages.

And if the claim is that others got sick because of you, it would seem that you would have to prove that as well. And that individual would be the one to have to file the lawsuit

The only way I think you’d be awarded anything significant is if you did have a significant medical problem as a result and for those under 23, that’s going to be extremely unlikely. But, that person would still have to prove how they got the virus

Maybe, there is something I am missing

 

[The Original Fade]

I’m not sure they are worried about legal liability as much as they are about getting bad PR and the public’s perception that participating in football led to the infection, accurate or not.

 

[kcvols1]

What you're missing is the number of "seek and find" litigations that are bound to occur.

Still gotta get past the notice pleading requirement in federal court.

 

[PlanetVolunteer]

No you're not missing anything.

I talked to my lawyer father about it. Yes you'd have to prove they got it because of football which is next to impossible and you'd have to prove some kind of negligence on the part of the university. On top of all that the players are open about their understanding of the risk.

There's all of that and the fact remaining that they are not in any real danger from the virus according to the data and its not like they could prove that if they weren't playing football they wouldn't get it...i mean its a global pandemic! Its everywhere and players got it on their own before they reported to camp.

There's no sense to any of it.

 

[GreveHaller]

This goes farther than universities. If a person contracts COVID, can they claim it as Workers Comp or IOD? If just one person at their work had it then there's the potential of contracting it at work thus work related. Very hard to prove they didnt get it from that person

 

[LargePairOfVols]

Your logic seems sound. I would think that for there to be a legit lawsuit there would have to be damages (ie. hospital costs, etc.). And very difficult to prove where the player contracted the virus.

 

[EZE]

1. Where they got the virus may or may not be hard to prove. It just depends on the circumstances. If there is a widespread outbreak, much easier to make a case.

1.b. Just getting if wouldn’t establish liability. There would also have to be some negligence on behalf of the University. This is where the written protocol is important. But, at the end of the day, another issue that depends on the circumstances.

2. You are making an assumption that NO players will have an adverse result. And, while you are right that 90+% of these athletes probably have no adverse effects, you could face enormous liability if you have that one case and it is a player projected to be an NFL Star.

Other important note. A lawyer doesn’t have to prove a winnable case to file a lawsuit and ultimately get to a jury. And, once they get to that jury, all bets are off. It is why so many cases settle.

There are other issues, but these should give you an idea.

 

[TrumpedUpVol]

Clay Travis, who posts on this forum as @evillawyer, had a short string of tweets today confirming your understanding and lambasting those who consider this to be an issue.

 

[08Vol]

One of the things I don’t understand is the issue of these universities being worried about liability.

1. The problem would seem to be that you have to prove where they got the virus, which I would think is impossible.

That’s why I don’t get the liability thing.

How the heck do you prove where, when and how the virus was acquired so as to claim that the school (or whomever) is responsible.

but....

2. You’d have to prove “damages” somehow. So, I don’t know what you could get awarded if you never even displayed symptoms or that you were never hospitalized or that you never had to pay for any of the medical care you received. You didn’t miss work, so you don’t have lost wages.

And if the claim is that others got sick because of you, it would seem that you would have to prove that as well. And that individual would be the one to have to file the lawsuit

The only way I think you’d be awarded anything significant is if you did have a significant medical problem as a result and for those under 23, that’s going to be extremely unlikely. But, that person would still have to prove how they got the virus

Maybe, there is something I am missing

We literally have an entire medical field dedicated to tracking the acute spread of infectious diseases. Look up epidemiology and contact tracing. Tracking the spread of this virus isn’t impossible, it’s just hard and you have to pay people to do it.

 

[TennVols12]

What you're missing is the number of "seek and find" litigations that are bound to occur.

Man, I swear you have an answer for literally everything on these chat boards.

 

[NoAlblazervol]

A lawsuit would be a tough row to hoe. There would be 2 points. First there would have to proof that the infection occurred as a result of the activity. Remember everyone has the option to “opt out” without penalty so it makes it a completely voluntary activity. Secondly you’d have to show negligence. The current testing and safety precautions are so far above what other activities require that negligence would be really hard to sell.

 

[NoAlblazervol]

And no I’m not a lawyer I’m a physician that serves on the advisory board of a large malpractice carrier

 

[volwindy]

I’m not sure they are worried about legal liability as much as they are about getting bad PR and the public’s perception that participating in football led to the infection, accurate or not.

Pretty much this...

There is always liability. I worked in an insurance defense firm for 6.5 years. There was a case with a school where there was an off-site event. A number of students in one car were severely injured or killed in an accident going to the event because the student driver ran a stop sign and a truck hit them.

The school paid out on their policy. Why?
1. The main argument was that the school should have provided transportation or better care of students
2. Didn't want the exposure
3. Kids essentially...with their entire lives ahead of them with now severe injuries or death
4. Jury would not like kids being hurt/killed and probably offered the families even more since they think schools have deep pockets

It's obvious so many think differently about COVID, which is an issue for all these individual and class action cases that are now popping up. Are some going to have to pay out even if they aren't at fault? Yep.

 

[GAVol]

If your 'father' was ever a prosecutor, there is no way in hell he would agree with you.

Don’t think a prosecutor would touch this. There’s no criminal act.

 

[Iam4utalways]

As long as a player can opt out and it only costs them the year of eligibility, and their teammates and coaches respect the decision that is their’s to make, liability should not be an issue.

It is on a voluntary basis for them to play football or go to college.

 

[reecetn]

The demographics on the CDC site show that people in the age group of NCAA athletes rarely die. Of those in said age group that did die how many of them were in the condition of an NCAA student athlete?

If student athletes were not tested for the flu how many of the positives that have surfaced would have even known they had it?

 

[NashVol11]

One of the things I don’t understand is the issue of these universities being worried about liability.

1. The problem would seem to be that you have to prove where they got the virus, which I would think is impossible.

That’s why I don’t get the liability thing.

How the heck do you prove where, when and how the virus was acquired so as to claim that the school (or whomever) is responsible.

but....

2. You’d have to prove “damages” somehow. So, I don’t know what you could get awarded if you never even displayed symptoms or that you were never hospitalized or that you never had to pay for any of the medical care you received. You didn’t miss work, so you don’t have lost wages.

And if the claim is that others got sick because of you, it would seem that you would have to prove that as well. And that individual would be the one to have to file the lawsuit

The only way I think you’d be awarded anything significant is if you did have a significant medical problem as a result and for those under 23, that’s going to be extremely unlikely. But, that person would still have to prove how they got the virus

Maybe, there is something I am missing

Not my area, but would imagine that you could just show that the schools/NCAA negligently put players at risk of long-term health effects without adequately investigating/researching what those effects are. Don't think you would have to show that the virus was acquired FROM playing, if playing substantially increases the risk (theoretically, with these CTE cases, those could have happened off the field too).

Damages would be any long-term effects that these players are experiencing years from now. For example, maybe we find next year that COVID wrecks your lung capacity and leads to long-term respiratory issues - any player who eventually experiences those could claim damages and argue that the NCAA negligently put their health at risk in order to rush a football season

 

[BogeyVol]

One of the things I don’t understand is the issue of these universities being worried about liability.

1. The problem would seem to be that you have to prove where they got the virus, which I would think is impossible.

That’s why I don’t get the liability thing.

How the heck do you prove where, when and how the virus was acquired so as to claim that the school (or whomever) is responsible.

but....

2. You’d have to prove “damages” somehow. So, I don’t know what you could get awarded if you never even displayed symptoms or that you were never hospitalized or that you never had to pay for any of the medical care you received. You didn’t miss work, so you don’t have lost wages.

And if the claim is that others got sick because of you, it would seem that you would have to prove that as well. And that individual would be the one to have to file the lawsuit

The only way I think you’d be awarded anything significant is if you did have a significant medical problem as a result and for those under 23, that’s going to be extremely unlikely. But, that person would still have to prove how they got the virus

Maybe, there is something I am missing

Wondered exactly the same thing for a while now. Furthermore, if there is liability for covid-19, why is there not liability for the flu? Pneumonia?

All are environmental illnesses able to be contracted literally anywhere.

 

[CINCYVOL]

One of the things I don’t understand is the issue of these universities being worried about liability.

1. The problem would seem to be that you have to prove where they got the virus, which I would think is impossible.

That’s why I don’t get the liability thing.

How the heck do you prove where, when and how the virus was acquired so as to claim that the school (or whomever) is responsible.

but....

2. You’d have to prove “damages” somehow. So, I don’t know what you could get awarded if you never even displayed symptoms or that you were never hospitalized or that you never had to pay for any of the medical care you received. You didn’t miss work, so you don’t have lost wages.

And if the claim is that others got sick because of you, it would seem that you would have to prove that as well. And that individual would be the one to have to file the lawsuit

The only way I think you’d be awarded anything significant is if you did have a significant medical problem as a result and for those under 23, that’s going to be extremely unlikely. But, that person would still have to prove how they got the virus

Maybe, there is something I am missing

Make em sign a waiver like at Full Throttle Karts.

 

[TVOL71]

I would think somewhere there has been a football/basketball/etc player who has gotten the flu or something similar and been hospitalized. Maybe I have missed it, but I have never heard of someone in that situation suing a university, so I am not sure how this would be any different.

 

[ClockworkOrange]

My mother used to be a court reporter. She was working one trial where a guy sued Krogers because he was walking down an aisle and a can of biscuits popped open, startling him, and SIX MONTHS LATER he had a heart attack. Krogers paid him $10,000 to go away.

 

[TennesseeTarheel]

I went to Jersey Mikes and ordered a ham sandwich but they said they didn't have any, they'd all been indicted.

 

[happy-go_vol]

No you're not missing anything.

I talked to my lawyer father about it. Yes you'd have to prove they got it because of football which is next to impossible and you'd have to prove some kind of negligence on the part of the university. On top of all that the players are open about their understanding of the risk.

There's all of that and the fact remaining that they are not in any real danger from the virus according to the data and its not like they could prove that if they weren't playing football they wouldn't get it...i mean its a global pandemic! Its everywhere and players got it on their own before they reported to camp.

There's no sense to any of it.

I work for people who get it everyday. Any serious complications are very rare. Any player who gets it would be fine.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Our resident Bird Law experts aren't going to provide the OP with the necessary answers. Bless his heart for thinking they were real lawyers though.

 

[Sir Bob Tosky]

There are a lot of problems with this type of law suit, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the university wouldn’t settle a claim.

If it’s a state law negligence claim against the university and its employees, it would likely go through the Tennessee Claims Commission or if local government officials or health care providers not employed by the university are also named, before a circuit court judge. The player would not be entitled to a jury trial for negligence claims against the university or its employees, but would be entitled to one for claims against a health care provider not employed by the university. Juries in East Tennessee are notoriously conservative, so even if a claimant were entitled to one, they probably would not have a lot luck. A judge making the decision brings in a political element, so there would likely be varying results.

Either way, it would probably be difficult to prove negligence or a high amount of damages for many of the reasons that have already been pointed out. But, keep in mind that even if there is a finding of negligence and causation, damages against government entities and their employees are capped at 300k for negligence claims in Tennessee. That cap wouldn't apply to a non-government defendant such as a health care provider not employed by the university. So, the university could possibly shift some of the potential liability to providers not employed by the university by hiring them to advise them on protocols, however those waters get murky.

You also have to consider that damages based on any lost future earnings, which seems to be what a lot of commentators are focusing on, will be entirely speculative for most players. Unless you are a Trey Smith type who can definitively show you would have been picked in the first round or two, and players picked in those spots typically sign deals worth x amount, you’re claim probably isn’t worth all that much unless the worst happens and the player dies. But again, if it is a state court negligence claim against the university or its employees, the player would still only be able to recover a maximum of 300k no matter how good their claim is or how bad their injuries are, up to and including death, unless a non-government defendant were also involved.

It just doesn't seem like this has much to do with legal liability. It seems like some schools figured out how expensive it would be to administer protocols and threw in the towel.