Forward progress: Personal injury suits against helmet maker moving forward

By Joseph M. Hanna

Press Release

25 May 2017

After a delay and the conclusion of the NFL concussion litigation, the 95 personal injury suits against Riddell, the former official helmet supplier for the NFL, are moving forward. On May 18, 2017, U.S. District Judge Anita Brody, a Pennsylvania federal court judge, issued a scheduling order for the claims against Riddell. Some of these suits were initially brought in 2012 and were later separated from the multidistrict concussion suit filed by ex-NFL players or their families.

suit against Riddell by NCAA football players was dismissed in 2016 because the complaint failed to show the helmets had any manufacturing defects. However, the former NFL players are claiming Riddell failed to warn players of multiple head injuries leading to long-term brain damage even if Riddell’s helmets were properly worn. The players also allege there were possible defects with the helmet’s design.

Riddell marketed their helmet, the Revolution, as a way to decrease the likelihood of a concussion by 31 percent. The players allege Riddell knew this statistic was faulty, yet failed to disclose this information. A firm hired by Riddell to test the helmets stated, “no football helmet, no matter how revolutionary, could prevent concussions.” Riddell never disclosed this study, nor did they modify their marketing strategy. The author of the study was very blunt in stating, “No helmet can prevent a concussion. Full stop.” In response, Riddell maintains that the helmet meets all the usage and test requirements set by the National Operating Committee for Standards on Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE). Previously, Riddell has been found 27 percent fault in a Colorado trial, when a high school football player sued Riddell for a 2008 brain injury. In 2012, a jury found Riddell not responsible when another high school football player in Mississippi suffered a stroke after practice.

With Judge Brody issuing a scheduling order, attention now turns to see if she will allow a new master administrative complaint to surpass those claims that were part of the multidistrict NFL concussion suit. Riddell is expected to oppose a new administrative complaint and the additional fraud claims the plaintiffs filed last month. These added claims include fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and fraudulent concealment.

Views

3481

Related Articles

About the Author

Joseph M. Hanna

Joseph M. Hanna

Joseph Hanna is a partner of Goldberg Segalla and concentrates his practice in commercial litigation with a focus on sports and entertainment law and retail, hospitality, and development litigation. Joe represents sports franchises, professional athletes, and movie studios with various issues related to licensing, contracts, and day-to-day management. He serves as Chair of Goldberg Segalla’s Sports and Entertainment Law Practice Group and editor of the firm’s Sports and Entertainment Law Insider blog. In addition, Joe is the Chair of Goldberg Segalla's Diversity Task Force. He possesses an AV rating from Martindale-Hubbell.
  • This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.

Official partners 

BASL
Soccerex Core Logo
SLA LOGO 1kpx
YRDA Logo2
SAC logo LawAccord

Copyright © LawInSport Limited 2010 - 2018. These pages contain general information only. Nothing in these pages constitutes legal advice. You should consult a suitably qualified lawyer on any specific legal problem or matter. The information provided here was accurate as of the day it was posted; however, the law may have changed since that date. This information is not intended to be, and should not be used as, a substitute for taking legal advice in any specific situation. LawInSport is not responsible for any actions taken or not taken on the basis of this information. Please refer to the full terms and conditions on our website.