- Journal Archives
- Volume 18
- Volume 17
- Volume 16
- Volume 15
- Volume 14
- Volume 13
- Volume 12
- Volume 11
- Volume 10
- Volume 9
- Volume 8
- Volume 7
- Volume 6
- Volume 5
- Volume 4
- Volume 3
- Volume 2
- Volume 1
It seems that Major League Baseball is mentioned in the news more often for steroid-related scandals than for actual sports news. While steroids have certainly become a major problem for MLB, the media rarely addresses the subject of the league’s culture of alcohol abuse. Alcohol abuse in MLB clubhouses is usually only highlighted following a tragedy, such as the death of Josh Hancock, a St. Louis Cardinals relief pitcher, who died in an alcohol-related car accident in 2007.
Alcohol may be as much a part of baseball as the sport is a part of American culture. Unfortunately, MLB’s alcohol policy has done little to discourage heavy drinking among players. This policy could lead to substantial liability for the league and it’s time that MLB executives start paying attention to this serious legal and safety problem.
Don’t miss One Strike and You’re Out: Alcohol in the Major League Baseball Clubhouse in the Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law‘s Winter 2009 edition. The Note abstract follows.
In the past decade, much has been written about Major League Baseball’s (MLB) mistaken policies regarding performance-enhancing substance abuse by players. MLB executives are shortsighted, however, if they believe that steroids are the only substances being abused by players. Along with performance-enhancing drugs, professional baseball has a long-standing history of alcohol abuse. Steroids may provide better headlines—Congress has never held an investigation into alcohol abuse by professional athletes—but professional baseball faces a real danger from the unchecked liability of allowing players to overindulge at the ballpark and drive home shortly thereafter. By serving beer in the clubhouse after games, clubs are subjecting themselves, their players, and the public to undue danger.
This Note asks whether an MLB club would be vicariously liable for injuries to third parties resulting from the drunk driving of players who drank club-provided alcohol following a game. To address this question, the Note first will show that baseball and alcohol have a long and often negative history. Subsequently, it discusses the legal framework for third-party liability, describing three formulations of vicarious liability that may create liability for the clubs. Next, this Note argues that MLB clubs could be held liable under both standard theories of third-party liability as well as respondeat superior employer liability. Finally, this Note proposes potential and easy solutions to MLB’s problem.
Note Author: Steven B. Berneman
The "Spiritual Temperature" of Contemporary Popular Music: An Alternative to the Legal Regulation of Death-Metal and Gangsta-Rap Lyrics Internet Retailers and Intertype Competition: How the Supreme Court's Incomplete Analysis in Leegin v. PSKS Leaves Lower Courts Improperly Equipped to Consider Modern Resale Price Maintenance Agreements
Recent Blog Posts
- If You Build It, They Will Come: Baseball and the Reopening of Cuba
- First Circuit Aligns With Third: Actavis Extends Beyond Cash Settlements
- Current Issues in Technology Law: Dr. Asma Vranaki Analyzes Data Privacy Regulation in the Context of Facebook Advertisements
- Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law Rises in National Law Journal Rankings
- Dancing Babies: The Ninth Circuit May Have Protected Them from Computer Algorithms
- Starbucks’ Next Top Model: It Could Be You
Tagsadvertising antitrust Apple books career celebrities contracts copyright copyright infringement courts creative content criminal law entertainment Facebook FCC film/television financial First Amendment games Google government intellectual property internet JETLaw journalism lawsuits legislation media medicine Monday Morning JETLawg music NFL patents privacy progress publicity rights radio social networking sports Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) technology telecommunications trademarks Twitter U.S. Constitution