Primrose v. Amelia Little League

990 S.W.2d 819 (1999)

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

Primrose v. Amelia Little League

Texas Court of Appeals
990 S.W.2d 819 (1999)

Facts

The Lumberton All Star team played a youth baseball game against the Amelia All Star team. After the game, two Lumberton players, Larry Primrose II and Chad Hampshire, suffered injuries when they were attacked in the nearby parking lot with bats and other objects by several Amelia players. Larry’s parents, Larry Primrose and Lorna Primrose (Primroses), and Chad’s parents, Bobby Hampshire and Winnie Hampshire (Hampshires) (collectively, plaintiffs), sued the Amelia Little League (league) (defendant) on various theories premised on, among other things, the league’s (1) failure to control the Amelia players and (2) negligence in not preventing the attack despite alleged escalating threats by the Amelia players against the Lumberton players during the game. The league moved for summary judgment, arguing that it had no duty to control the Amelia players and that it had not acted negligently. In response, Bobby Hampshire submitted an affidavit describing the alleged threats and claiming that during the game he asked the home-plate umpire to ask Amelia’s coaches and manager to take action and that after the game he directly asked Amelia’s manager to take action. However, the league’s president submitted an affidavit stating that there was nothing unusual about the game except he heard discussions about racial slurs uttered by Lumberton players against Amelia’s players and that he was not warned about a possible attack in the parking lot. The league also submitted unrebutted evidence that the Amelia players and their parents were not the league’s employees or agents and that the Amelia players were not paid by the league and did not transact business for the league. In addition, no evidence was presented that Amelia’s coaches or manager represented the league. The trial court granted summary judgment to the league. The Primroses and Hampshires appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Stover, 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