Attorneys for the Cooperstown Dreams Park have denied allegations of negligence made in a lawsuit brought by the father a 13-year-old baseball player who sustained a traumatic brain injury during a game at the park.
The response was filed Tuesday, April 30 in response to the complaint filed by Ron Labin, the father of the injured child, in February in New York County Supreme Court.
Anthony Labin, of Westfield, New Jersey, was 12 years old in July 2022 when he was struck in the head with a line drive while pitching during a game at the park, according to court documents.
He was knocked unconscious by the blow.
Two days later, Anthony underwent brain surgery to remove a part of his skull to help alleviate the pressure and swelling that was building up in his brain, according to a story about Anthony on the RWJBarnabas Health website.
He was hospitalized for five weeks at Children’s Specialized Hospital in New Brunswick.
The lawsuit alleges that the park misrepresented the level of medical care available on site, permitted the use of aluminum and composite bats with a “trampoline effect” and regularly played unevenly matched teams against each other.
The Labin family alleged that Anthony laid on the field for a significant time before any park employees arrived to attend to the situation.
The complaint also alleges that the park violated state Department of Health mandates for children’s camps by not following safety protocols.
No specific amount of money was sought in the complaint, as per New York state law.
The park’s response stated that it denied the allegations that it pitted teams with talent disparities against each other in lopsided games, used aluminum bats and failed to implement safety protocols.
The park disputed the court’s jurisdiction, stating that the proper venue would be Otsego County court, not New York County which covers New York City’s borough of Manhattan.
The response also stated that Anthony was culpable for any injuries he sustained through his own failure to take responsible safety precautions and the assumptive risk of playing the game, and that the complaint does not state a basis upon which punitive damages would be granted.
“These damages are improper, unwarranted, not authorized by law and … are against public policy,” the response stated.
If the park is found liable, the park would claim the benefit of limited liability provisions, and such liability would be based on the culpability of the park, at less than 51% of the total culpability of all liable parties.