Brown v. S.F. Ball Club, Inc. - 99 Cal. App. 2d 484, 222 P.2d 19 (1950)

Rule:

The duty imposed by law on the proprietor or operator of a baseball stadium toward his patrons is performed when screened seats are provided for as many as may be reasonably expected to call for them on any ordinary occasion. A spectator chooses to occupy an unscreened seat, or is unable to secure a screened seat and consequently occupies one that is not protected, he assumes the risk of being struck by thrown or batted balls; and if injured, thereby is precluded from recovering damages therefor. It is common knowledge that in baseball games hard balls are thrown and batted with such great swiftness they are liable to be thrown or batted outside the lines of the diamond, and spectators occupying positions which may be reached by such balls assume the risk of injury therefrom.

Facts:

Appellant, Myrtle R. Brown, attended a baseball game game as the guest of friends, one of whom furnished and purchased the tickets which were for seats in an unscreened portion of the stadium, near the first-base line. During the course of the game, appellant was struck by some object and sustained serious injury. Appellant filed the present case against respondent San Francisco Ball Club, Inc., the owner and operator of the stadium where the game was held. The district court entered a judgment upon a directed verdict for the respondent. Appellant challenged the decision.

Issue:

If a baseball spectator sits in unscreened portion of a ball park and thereby sustained injury, should the ball club corporation be held liable for such injury?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court held that the spectator's injury was not caused by any failure on the part of the ball club corporation to perform any duty owed to the spectator and that the injury did not give rise to a cause of action against the ball club corporation for damages. The court held that the ball club corporation, as proprietor, was not an insurer of safety but was required to use reasonable care to keep the premises in a reasonably safe condition and to give warning of latent or concealed perils. The ball club corporation was not liable for injury from a danger that was obvious or should have been observed in the exercise of reasonable care. The court held that the risks of sitting in an unscreened portion of a ball park were obvious and inherent and were imputed to the spectator and should have been observed by the spectator in the exercise of ordinary care. The court held that the spectator assumed the risk of injury and that the injury was not caused by negligence on the part of the ball club corporation.