Reggie Bush Reportedly to Sue City of St. Louis After Season-Ending Injury

[RamzFanz]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...om&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial

San Francisco 49ers running back Reggie Bush tore his MCL after slipping on concrete on the sideline of the St. Louis Rams' Edward Jones Dome on Nov. 1. In the aftermath of a possible career-ending injury, Bush is reportedly taking legal action.

CBSSports.com's Jason La Canfora reported Saturday that Bush is planning on suing the city of St. Louis and has hired the KWIKA law firm to handle his case. According to La Canfora, Bush is likely to cite gross negligence in the lawsuit.

Bush was hoping to make an impact in 2015 for a 49ers team that needed playmakers in the backfield to complement Carlos Hyde and pass-catchers to help signal-caller Colin Kaepernick. In Week 1, however, Bush suffered a calf injury, and he failed to make much of an impression leading up to his injury last Sunday.

Bush has only eight carries for 28 yards and four receptions for 19 yards. Considering that lack of production, his one-year contract and the fact that he will turn 31 before the start of next season, Bush's NFLfuture is in jeopardy.

The lawsuit may not be as much about money as taking a stand. The Edward Jones Dome's sideline concrete puts players in even more danger than they already face while playing football.

Just one week before Bush suffered his injury, Cleveland Browns quarterback Josh McCown slipped on the same concrete, ran into a wall and fell down. The issue could be addressed before Bush's reported impending litigation forces the Rams into some kind of action.

Mike Garafolo of Fox Sports reported Tuesday that "the Rams have informed the NFL and the city of St. Louis they want changes made to the concrete area behind the benches before their next home game," which is Nov. 15 against the Chicago Bears.

 

[RamzFanz]

They should add spikes. That'll slow them down.

 

[JoeBo21]

better have some carpeting down before we play da bears

 

[ChrisW]

meh, don't get me started on this.

 

[Rambitious1]

I don't know the liability laws in Missouri, but off the top of my head I'd say he has a pretty good case.
At least against the entity that is supposed to do upkeep/maintenance for that part of the field.

 

[jap]

Maybe we can line the concrete with a bed of female Kardashians.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

How can Bush prove that he tore his ACL on the concrete and not on the field?

And seeing that same mistake the week before isn't it suspicious that he does the same exact thing and wants to sue right away? How many times has this happened over the years? I don't recall any others being injured hitting the wall. Players don't usually get to the concrete.

I don't see how he wins this.

 

[fearsomefour]

Reggie Bush needs to send his national title hardware back.

 

[jrry32]

How can Bush prove that he tore his ACL on the concrete and not on the field?

And seeing that same mistake the week before isn't it suspicious that he does the same exact thing and wants to sue right away? How many times has this happened over the years? I don't recall any others being injured hitting the wall. Players don't usually get to the concrete.

I don't see how he wins this.

I think he can do that. That'll be important to his case but it's definitely doable.

It seems like a winnable case for me. There's going to be an assumption of risk question but you can likely argue out of that one. From there, it'll just be about proving whether there was a breach (in this case, was not taking measures to cover the concrete grossly negligent?) and that the concrete being exposed caused his injury. Plus, he'll have to prove damages...that'll be a bit harder but also possible.

 

[ChrisW]

Is the city really held liable when the field is set to NFL specifications and there's nothing in the rule book about that area? I've read the field specifications and it says nothing beyond the player areas on the sidelines.


The dome isn't even the only field that has this open concrete in that general area.

 

[blue4]

Is the city really held liable when the field is set to NFL specifications and there's nothing in the rule book about that area? I've read the field specifications and it says nothing beyond the player areas on the sidelines.


The dome isn't even the only field that has this open concrete in that general area.

No guidelines, no case IMO.

 

[blue4]

He wins this, every player who gets hurt on a muddy field, in the rain, dirt outfield, etc will sue cities.

For people who play a professional violent sport for a living, sure is a lot of crying lately about getting hurt.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I think he can do that. That'll be important to his case but it's definitely doable.

It seems like a winnable case for me. There's going to be an assumption of risk question but you can likely argue out of that one. From there, it'll just be about proving whether there was a breach (in this case, was not taking measures to cover the concrete grossly negligent?) and that the concrete being exposed caused his injury. Plus, he'll have to prove damages...that'll be a bit harder but also possible.

Couldn't he have refused to play there because of the concrete? And is there an NFL standard for playing surface area? If there is a minimum requirement for how much surface needs to be covered and it is met then it would be the NFL's fault in a way. I am sure there is a purpose for the concrete, like rolling out carts and such for set ups.

I really don't think he can prove that the tear happened off of the turf.

 

[drasconis]

Note sure it is reasonable to say that the concrete is a risk? I heard that the only other such injury happened the week before, so not a long history of it happening. Besides don't these guys run out of concrete tunnels? Is the argument that the concrete area is inherently dangerous or could be expected to be? As others said, yeah it isn't soft, but it could be in place for reasonable reasons, it could also be argued that having a different surface down still results in a seem which might be just as hazardous.

 

[jrry32]

Couldn't he have refused to play there because of the concrete? And is there an NFL standard for playing surface area? If there is a minimum requirement for how much surface needs to be covered and it is met then it would be the NFL's fault in a way. I am sure there is a purpose for the concrete, like rolling out carts and such for set ups.

I really don't think he can prove that the tear happened off of the turf.

That will be the assumption of the risk argument. Especially after the McCown injury. But I don't consider it particularly strong. He's under contract and claiming he should just not do his job isn't really a reasonable argument.

As for a minimum requirement, I have no idea. But I doubt there's a minimum requirement that will protect them from being sued when there's an unreasonably dangerous hazard on the field area.(if it is determined to be that)

And like I said, I think he'll be able to. Get expert witnesses that are doctors to analyze the video and explain how the torquing of his knee or the step he took on the concrete is where he tore his ACL. I think it's an argument that can definitely be made successfully.

 

[blue4]

I think it's an argument that can definitely be made successfully.

There's very few arguments that can't be made successfully in court anymore. To me the plaintiff will end up being the NFL, since it sets the requirements for a game to be played, whether that's player rules or stadium setting. Since he's not going to lose a dime of his wages, I doubt he gets more than maybe a cursory settlement with no admission of guilt. Which is all he really wants, free money.

 

[blue4]

Next player we have getting injured on a field like in Philadelphia that's muddier than the surrounding area, we sue. Next field with accumulated snow, we sue. Next cold weather stadium with less than 30 heaters on the sidelines to keep our muscles loose, we sue. Next stadium with hot water problems we sue. Next player twists an ankle on Oakland's infield, sue. "My football's inflated wrong", "I got hit on a slide" "I played a high impact sport for 15 years and got a concussion back before medical practice knew how to diagnose and deal with them", "I sprinted needlessly straight out of bounds and ran past the benches to some concrete and fell down."

Gentleman, start your lawyers, the New Freaking Litigation league is here. Is this league becoming no fucking fun anymore or what?

 

[shaunpinney]

I blame the person in the 10th row up, 4 in from the left, who broke wind momentarily distracting Reggie when light reflected of the rim of their glasses as they lifted their right bum-cheek to let out the air... so yes lets sue all glasses wearers who fart too...

 

[Todd59]

In my opinion, you'd have to prove that the field setup is unsafe, even though over 200 NFL games, along with numerous college and high school games, have been played there without the concrete being a problem. The injury is unfortunate, and it's easy to feel sorry for Bush, but to say the city is negligent would be hard to prove.