Expensive bathroom break

July 10, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
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. Interesting that the new laws in criminal code all involve voter fraud

  2. I'm getting divorced and we have prenuptial and judge said it stands even though he made me sign it 2 days before wedding then I be c ame ill and left with nothing butbills

  3. No irony here, John. Conour’s clients are wise to him. Evidently you’ve missed discovery that disclosed Conour was aware he was caught with his hand in the cookie jar, actually many cookie jars, but continued to spend any monies he secured on himself and his lifestyle. Your theory is idealistic and assumes Conour has the soul of a good attorney and therefore he would take care of his clients. Conour has no soul. He greedily took awarded settlements from his disabled clients and spent it on his own edacious desires. You are naïve to think if he kept working he would put his fees into a restitution fund. He is who he is and has proven he will use any means to cheat and manipulate those who trust him and the judicial system that is supposed to protect them. Sorry John, you don’t send the fox back into the hen house after he’s caught devouring the hens. Conour can’t be trusted. He has no more honor than that fox.

  4. The court of appeals not only tries to rewrite or interpret the law to suit their fancy, now they choose play stupid as well. Every consideration must be given to pro se litigants, who are not held to the same standards as attorneys, as stated by,SCOTUS. I assume they didn't have a lawyer, since one wasn't mentioned and I strongly suggest thatb the rest of the, origional petitioners get back in there and fight for their rights.

  5. the irony of situations like this is that the clients whom conour cheated are the ones who should be pulling hardest for him to remain free and keep his law license, so they have some hopes of him paying back. really bury the guy deep and then there will be little hope of restitution

ADVERTISEMENT