Martinez v. Houston McLane Company
Texas Court of Appeals
414 S.W.3d 219 (2013)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
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…
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.