Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals, Inc.

601 F.2d 516 (l0th Cir. 1979)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Hackbart (P) was a pro-football player. He was intentionally injured by a member of an opposing team during the playing of a professional football game. At trial, Charles Clark (D) admitted that the blow that had been struck was not accidental and had been issued with intent. D had hit P in the back of his head and his neck. The rules of the game prohibit the striking of intentional blows not related to the play of the game. The trial court did find that D had hit P out of anger and frustration but not with an intent to injure him. The trial court ruled against P as a matter of law because the game itself was violent in nature and P had in effect consented to such conduct even though not part of the game. Also, the court held that the remedy for such conduct was provided for in the rules of the game. P appealed.