Martinez v. Houston McLane Company

414 S.W.3d 219 (2013)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Martinez v. Houston McLane Company

Texas Court of Appeals
414 S.W.3d 219 (2013)

Facts

Shirley Martinez (plaintiff) attended a Houston Astros game with her husband Richard Martinez (plaintiff) using tickets the Astros donated at Shirley’s request. Shirley did not request seats in any particular stadium section or request seats protected by screening to prevent a ball from reaching her seat. Shirley’s seats—which the Astros selected—were in the outfield bleachers and did not have protective screening. During batting practice, Shirley was injured when a batted ball hit her in the face while she was ascending stairs with her back facing the field. Shirley was ascending the stairs because an usher instructed her to take a stroller she was using to another area. Shirley and Richard sued the Houston McLane Company LLC (Astros) (defendant), which did business as the Astros, for negligence and premises liability. The trial court granted summary judgment to the Astros. The Martinezes appealed. The Astros argued that, pursuant to the so-called “baseball rule,” a stadium owner has a duty to provide screened seats only for patrons who request them. The Astros allegedly complied with this duty because the Martinezes never requested screened seats, which were available for the game. The Martinezes responded that the baseball rule should be abrogated because it was out of step with new developments in the law since its adoption, such as the elimination of the assumption-of-the-risk doctrine and Texas’s adoption of comparative negligence. The Martinezes further argued that the Astros did not comply with the rule because the screens provided for certain seats were inadequate. Finally, the Martinezes argued that the Astros should be held liable for Shirley’s injuries because the usher diverted her attention from the field by making her move the stroller.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Brown, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership