Very strange that Cowgill would pursue this:
Cowgill Suing Trinity
- Thread starter Knucklehank1
- Start date
Yeah, the video of his injury incident shows Cowgill and another camera guy shooting video near the endzone, well away from any players, coaches, or other media folks. Not nearly the crowded sideline described in the lawsuit. Both guys were facing and videotaping the action; they should have had sufficient time to take evasive action. I suppose they stood their ground to “get the shot”. Sorry he was injured, but It’s definitely not a good look for Cowgill.
In the future I would ban all WLKY sports casters from covering any sports event in the city of Louisville.
The end result will be eliminating sideline access or everyone having to sign a waiver. I am a little surprised waivers weren’t already in place.
Bad look for Fred. Claiming that THS failed to notify him of the dangers is pretty much admitting that he was too dumb to assess the situation on his own. Someone should have talked him out of this one.
I wonder if the workers comp or liability insurance providers are basically making him sue? Any lawyers on here that know if that could be the case? I just cannot imagine he would pursue this on his own. His credibility is going to be severely damaged.
Seems like WLKY would have sent an intern to film high school football footage instead of a 30 year employee.
The “new culture“ in America …… no one taking responsibility for one’s own decisions.
The workers comp insurance provider for the tv station could bring the action on their own. It doesn't sound like this is the case here with Cowgill just being named as a party. With that said if Cowgill recovers for anything which the insurance provider has already paid benefits Cowgill would be required to indemnify the provider.
Me thinks he should spend more time getting lighter on his toes and less time at the 
i heard john boel? briefing on morning radio and he cited three possible cases of law and there was a term he used i can't remember, my apologies, but the gist was when you go near any sporting event, whether playing or spectating, there's a certain expectation of risk and you understand that risk, no matter if you don't understand where the risk came from. i've known three people involved in instances where a car was being driven near a golf course and a errant shot hit a vehicle on the road, and the result is that it was the vehicles fault for being near the sporting arena. my buddy drilled a car's window shield dead center while we were playing cherokee golf course and the driver chased him down in the fairway, they called the insurance, and they told the driver it was his responsibility.
and in cowgill's case, i guess the suit says under normal games in the past, there was much less people on the sidelines but for this game, the new coaches first one, cowgill is saying they allowed more people onto the sideline. i think his argument will be that trinity changed it's modus operandi for this event and that lead to his injury.
if he could somehow prove that every single other game he attended there had half the people, and somehow maybe now there were twice as much, i guess he could argue that trinity did not stick to what had been previously established protocols. if trinity, let's say, used to give out 100 sideline passes and for this game they gave out 200 but made no additional preparations for the extra people, and if they did nothing to ease the crowding with extra security or roped areas, he may be able to say that since he'd been there twenty times previously, and things were handled the exact same way those previous 20 times, then on the 21st time things were different, routines and protocols were changed, then he may have a case. otherwise to me, it's like sitting at a baseball game, if you get hit in the head by a foul ball or thrown bat, your fault for not paying attention knowing these types of things always happen, especially on football sidelines. personally, it tarnishes his image and is embarrassing to him. one time bad publicity is not good publicity
and in cowgill's case, i guess the suit says under normal games in the past, there was much less people on the sidelines but for this game, the new coaches first one, cowgill is saying they allowed more people onto the sideline. i think his argument will be that trinity changed it's modus operandi for this event and that lead to his injury.
if he could somehow prove that every single other game he attended there had half the people, and somehow maybe now there were twice as much, i guess he could argue that trinity did not stick to what had been previously established protocols. if trinity, let's say, used to give out 100 sideline passes and for this game they gave out 200 but made no additional preparations for the extra people, and if they did nothing to ease the crowding with extra security or roped areas, he may be able to say that since he'd been there twenty times previously, and things were handled the exact same way those previous 20 times, then on the 21st time things were different, routines and protocols were changed, then he may have a case. otherwise to me, it's like sitting at a baseball game, if you get hit in the head by a foul ball or thrown bat, your fault for not paying attention knowing these types of things always happen, especially on football sidelines. personally, it tarnishes his image and is embarrassing to him. one time bad publicity is not good publicity
It’s a civil suit that will probably never reach trial, as THS‘s Insurance Company will be inclined to settle it rather than risk a jury‘s decision.
I do not know Fred at all, but those who do, believe that his legal advice is based on pretty solid grounds. Negligence is in the eyes of the beholder, and that is the foundation of his claim.
I do not know Fred at all, but those who do, believe that his legal advice is based on pretty solid grounds. Negligence is in the eyes of the beholder, and that is the foundation of his claim.
Him getting a settlement of any kind would establish a bad precedent. If a settlement is reached, however, money or none, it will be confidential. I used to see Fred darting around in his Miata in Prospect all the time. If that car is upgraded to a Bugatti, we'll know something's up.
This kind of law serves only 3 purposes get the lawyers paid, Fred paid something and Trinity’s insurance goes up.
The only question is did Trinity do anything wrong that will force a settlement of some kind.
The only question is did Trinity do anything wrong that will force a settlement of some kind.
Cowgill’s attorney went to THS about a settlement early and was told to FO. He has a year to file a case and it was down the last 10 days or so. My guess is that his attorney was basically forced to file rather than dropping cowgill so late in the game and forcing him to try and retain other counsel at this late date - which would have probably netted him a bar complaint.
As for the assumption of risk angle - Kentucky has abolished the defense of pure assumption of risk. Qualified assumption of the risk remains available to a defendant as contributory negligence meaning if cowgill can prove that THS was 1% negligent, he could collect 1% of what he’s suing for.
That said, his interview after the event basically saying that he’s been lucky in the past and that he saw it unfolding and should have stopped filming to get out of the way - certainly won’t help his case. I suppose that the Trinity player and his parents should feel lucky that cowgill didn’t name them as well and drag them into this nonsense.
BP: my experience is the INSURER, not the client is the one that generally dictates any settlement. THS adidas the right thing by refusing to engage, but you can be assured the first thing they did was notify their Insurance Provider.
This will be an interesting story to follow, but I expect Cowgirl will be trading the Miata in for something well below a Bugatti ………. probably a handicap accessible Van.
This will be an interesting story to follow, but I expect Cowgirl will be trading the Miata in for something well below a Bugatti ………. probably a handicap accessible Van.