Inadequate Warning Label At Stadium Results in Severe Injury

Case Overview

This case takes place in Minnesota and involves a man who was attending a football game on a day when there were multiple thunderstorm and meteorology advisories for the area. The football stadium did not publicize to the attendants. The game continued despite the severe thunderstorm warnings. The game was called off an hour later when the weather worsened to a point that drivers were unable to safely operate their vehicles. The plaintiff was struck by lightning in the parking lot upon exiting the stadium. The plaintiff claims that the ticket purchase agreement on the back of the ticket was too small to read and therefore not binding. In addition, the plaintiff claims the defendant was liable due to their negligence in continuing the football game after the weather warning was issued. A ticket warning label expert is needed to opine on how the fine print does not exclude the stadium from liability in these circumstances.

Questions to the Forensic expert and their responses

Are you familiar with warning labels, specifically ones that are located on tickets such as the one in this case?

I am very familiar with warning labels, including the ones located on tickets such as the one in this case. I have worked on many cases that involve warnings and warning labels, and am familiar with industry standards (Moreso Industry Recommendations) for the size of print.

Is it possible for the 'fine print' on a warning label to be considered too small for a reasonable person to read?

Unfortunately, this national standard is not ultimately a rule so there is an allowable grey area for a producer of 'fine print' on tickets, but the recommendations speak to the necessity of clear and readable placement of warnings. In this case, it seems that this recommendation was not adhered to, so there is reason to believe this is a good case for the plaintiff.

If a warning label on a ticket is illegible, who maintains responsibility?

Ultimately, the football stadium would incur responsibility in this case.

About the expert

This expert earned a BA and PhD in experimental psychology and holds more than 40 years of experience in psyschophysics, cognitive science, perception, attention, memory, human factors, aging, and related areas. This expertise applies itself to a number of fields including warning labels, reaction time, etc. He formerly served as faculty in the psychology department at a number of universities, and has authored more than 100 publications on visual forensics as it relates to warnings, reactions, memory, and more. This expert is currently the principal of a visual expert human factors consulting firm.