Originally Posted by DarkCloudInc
You're making the point to target ESPN rather than AX, if the option to sue both isn't available. A lawyer wants a guaranteed source of income and it is in the best interest of the lawyer and their client to target the company that has the most available resources available, again if they had to choose a single company.
If there is alcohol involved, the vendor selling it is the one who's held liable. It is up to the vendor to know when to refuse selling liquor to the customer by law. With ESPN being the vendor, they are liable for selling liquor to an intoxicated person and their actions thereafter. If the person involved is intoxicated and an incident where an injury is a result, the injured party can not only sue the involved party but ESPN as well.
With ESPN having the most available resources on hand, they have the most options to manage their attendees. Should they fail to manage their attendees, they should be held accountable for their failures.
By the way, as a result of the US Supreme Court's ruling in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, a class action is no longer an easy option to take as companies can now force arbitration.
I'm not a lawyer, just a news junky.
The AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion decision that California can't enforce anti-arbitration clauses in contracts. Since the hypothetical situation doesn't involve signed contracts between the parties, I don't think that particular case law applies.
Again, we haven't said that ESPN couldn't be a party, but they have some very daunting legal professionals working for them that would, more likely, shift blame to the vendor that sold the alcohol, and they would have some minor liability since selling alcohol doesn't guarantee that all buyers of the same could handle their liquor. If you could sue the vendor for simply providing alcohol, than Anheiseur Busch (sp), Absolut, Bacardi, and other liquor makers would be a party to every drunken accident that occurs on the highways across America.
An attorney would be concerned with the overall settlement/monetary compensation, of course, but since the SPJA signed the agreement with IDG making them partners in the AX, and since there's open discussion online of their attendees worried about their safety, they would be the simplest pocket to go after, and now, IDG can be added as a party to such a litigation.
IDG is a Forbes 500 company with over $3.24 billion in earnings from 2011 per Forbes webste. Click here to see the Forbes profile.
ESPN is part of another Fortune 500 company, Disney, Inc.
So, there's two large companies to go after, but I bet IDG/SPJA would be a more appealing target than going after Disney's attorneys.