Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Remember the case of the guy who said he was ejected from Yankee Stadium for going to the bathroom during the singing of God Bless America in the seventh inning stretch? The lawsuit has now been settled, with the Yankees agreeing to pay $10,001 in damages and $12,000 in attorney's fees for the plaintiff.
Without admitting liability and without admitting that Mr. Campeau-Laurion had sustained any damages, the city agreed to pay a $10,001 settlement and also $12,000 to cover the plaintiff's attorneys' fees. The settlement [pdf] was entered before Judge Jed S. Rakoff in United States District Court in Manhattan.
But while they refused to admit guilt, they did admit that they had such a policy at the old Yankee Stadium and now stipulate that they do not have such a policy at the new stadium:
At Yankee Stadium, ushers, stadium security guards and the police had enforced the policy of restricting fan movements during the playing of "God Bless America."But in a stipulation [pdf] as part of the settlement of the lawsuit against the team and the city, the Yankees declared "that they have no policy or practice at the new Yankee Stadium that imposes any restrictions on fans wishing to move about the Stadium during the playing of 'God Bless America' that do not also apply during the rest of the game." The team also said it had no intention of instituting such a policy.
"We did it, we're just not admitting our guilt."
Politics
Comments
As I read it, NY City is paying the costs for their tenant's policy. I suppose taxpayers have to be good for something, even if they don't buy vastly overpriced tickets.
Posted by: kehrsam | July 18, 2009 9:21 AM
It probably won't take the shit-for-brains cops who do this sort of thing more than 3 or 4 years to get the word about the new policy.
Posted by: democommie | July 18, 2009 9:44 AM
No word on any disciplinary action against the usher I take it. Seems (always in retrospect) that adequately training staff is so much cheaper than attorney's fees!
Posted by: MikeMa | July 18, 2009 9:44 AM
I wonder if they have really stopped that idiotic policy. I'll be going to the game today at 1 and I will go to the bathroom during the 7th inning stretch.
Posted by: Goldbrick4 | July 18, 2009 10:20 AM
You have to be kidding me. Do the Yankees hire veterans of the Saudi Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice to work security?
You cannot enforce patriotism or religious observance in a truly free country. I've been waiting for a couple of years now for Major League Baseball to get over the "God Bless America" kick. We play the National Anthem before games, and Take Me Out To The Ball Game during the 7th inning stretch. That should be it.
Posted by: Gridlore | July 18, 2009 11:01 AM
I don't get it. What's all this about "God Bless America"? What about the "Star Spangled Banner" during which we kick limey ass at Fort William Henry with Red Glaring Rockets and stuff? Nobody better be moving around for THAT arbitrarily and inappropriately chosen icon!!!
Posted by: Greg Laden | July 18, 2009 11:20 AM
One of the most painful things for me as a die-hard Yankee fan is confronting the fact that Yankees onwership and management are a bunch of sick-fuck right-wing authoritarian scumbags.
Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | July 18, 2009 11:27 AM
Kehrsam: That's probably the exact relationship the Yankee ownership wants with the average New Yorker, something made obvious by the new stadium, built at tax-payer expense, to have fewer seats and more sky-boxes. Amazing what a few season passes to the city council can accomplish.
Posted by: Julian | July 18, 2009 11:32 AM
I have never understood the fascination with playing the national anthem at sporting events. And whenever the television goes to a commercial during "O, Canada" when a Canadian team in involved, it really underscores the jingoism.
Posted by: The Ridger | July 18, 2009 11:43 AM
During the NHL playoffs, I had the chance to hear "O, Canada" ruined (at an American venue) in the same way the US national anthem gets routinely butchered. Quite painful. I've never understood how such obnoxious and vainglorious riffing on the tune was supposed to display patriotism.
Posted by: Scott Hanley | July 18, 2009 12:25 PM
It's not about enforcing. It's about venting one's free-floating anger by punishing those damn liberal commie Obama-voting traitors who are ruining this damn country, also.
Posted by: xebecs | July 18, 2009 12:30 PM
Absolutely. I actually like The Star Spangled Banner, and I want to hear it straight up, vanilla, not the "auditioning for American Idol" version.
The WORST one ever though, was the woman who decided that as a prelude to TSSB, she should sing the line from that odious Lee Greenwood song -- "I'm proud to be an American".
That's right. "I'm proud to be an American" -- sung just as it is in the song -- followed by about 2 seconds of silence, and then "Oh say can you see". My stomach lurched.
The woman has been back for the anthem again since then, and did not repeat her little stunt. I'm hoping she got slapped down hard.
Posted by: xebecs | July 18, 2009 12:46 PM
Ignorant Canadian here: why $10,001? Why not an even $10K?
Posted by: Simon C. | July 18, 2009 1:42 PM
Ignorant Canadian here: why $10,001? Why not an even $10K?
Simon,
Quite often a case such as this will have specifically listed damages of a very minor amount, $1, $10, etc., a "cease and desist" (often with some sort of training, or punishment for those responsible) and then have a phrase about punitive damages, pecuniary damages, and/or court costs.
Posted by: dogmeatIB | July 18, 2009 2:50 PM
Am I the only one who's upset that the lawyer got more in fees than the man won in damages?
Posted by: David | July 18, 2009 3:56 PM
David,
It is annoying but I don't think in this case the lawyers fees came out of the guy's settlement. Regardless what the lawyer charged, his award would not change. I suspect the lawyer submitted his hours and costs and was paid based on those.
Posted by: MikeMa | July 18, 2009 5:50 PM
In most civil right cases, the attorney is entitled to fees (assuming the client prevails) by statute. Contingency arrangements won't work for a lot of civil rights cases because the actual damages may be small, but we still want people to be able to bring cases if they are, say, denied service in a restaurant or not allowed on the bus.
Posted by: Peter | July 19, 2009 9:17 PM