Expensive bathroom break

July 10, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
A guy gets up to go to the bathroom at the new Yankees Stadium during “God Bless America” during the 7th inning stretch, is kicked out by the New York Police Department, and makes $10,001 from the incident. His attorneys with the New York Civil Liberties Union Foundation made out even better from the incident: they got $12,000 in attorneys fees from the city of New York.

Bradford Campeau-Laurion filed his suit against the Yankees, the city, and NYPD detectives after the April incident, claiming religious and political discrimination. He agreed to the settlement in mid-June. The Yankees argued they don’t have a policy to throw people out if they moved around during “God Bless America.” According to news stories I’ve read, the Yankees allegedly don’t allow people to leave their seats during the playing of the song.

The police officers who threw the fan out said he smelled of alcohol and was disruptive, so that’s why he got the boot.

Let me get this straight: A guy who gets thrown out of a baseball game for going to pee during a song about God and America nets $10,001?

A) He shouldn’t have been thrown out in the first place because people should have the right to go to the bathroom. Unless he was drunk and causing a scene, (which the city and Yankees claimed, but then settled the suit) why should the police get involved? It’s not un-American to get up and move during a song about America. Is it respectful to stand there quietly while it plays? Yes. But based on what I’ve read about this case, his actions don’t justify being kicked out.

B) This issue ends up in litigation and racks up $12,000 in attorneys fees in two months? Wouldn’t it been cheaper for the city to just apologize and give him free tickets? It would have been cheaper if the city just let him be, but hindsight is 20/20.

And finally, C) Why the extra $1 tacked on to the $10,000?
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  2. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  3. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  4. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

  5. Baer filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals Seventh Circuit on April 30 2015. When will this be decided? How many more appeals does this guy have? Unbelievable this is dragging on like this.

ADVERTISEMENT