Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff, a professional football player, was injured when one of Defendant’s players intentionally struck him during a game. Both continued to play in the game and did not make any complaints at the time. Plaintiff later sued to recover for his injuries.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Even in an inherently violent situation such as a game of professional football, it is possible for one to go beyond its customs and so be liable for injuries in tort.
Issue. Was the Trial Court correct in finding that Plaintiff had no remedy at law due to the extremely violent nature of professional football?
Held. No. The judgment was reversed and remanded for a new trial. Despite the generally violent nature of professional football, there are rules prohibiting certain conduct such as the intentional striking of other players. The very existence of such rules demonstrates that there are boundaries to what constitutes acceptable behavior in the sport, and Plaintiff was entitled to a determination of whether his rights were violated.
It should not be limited without circumspection and no statute should be held to limit it unless it says so plainly.View Full Point of Law