## Facts

- Evelyn M. Jones attended Three Rivers Stadium on July 16, 1970, and was struck in the eye by a batted baseball during batting practice.
- The stadium included an interior concourse behind and above right field with large open viewing portals in the concourse wall.
- Jones stood in the right-field concourse near one portal, briefly looked out onto the field, then turned to leave and was hit.
- Jones presented evidence that the concourse design and pedestrian traffic pattern encouraged patrons to stop and divert attention from the walkway while looking onto the field.
- Jones testified she did not realize batting practice had begun and did not see home plate from her position.
- It was Jones’s first visit to Three Rivers Stadium; she testified that at Forbes Field patrons were not exposed to batted balls until they left walkways and entered seating-area ramps.
- A jury found the stadium operator and the baseball club negligent and awarded Jones $125,000.

## Issues

1. Whether the operators of a baseball stadium owed a duty of reasonable care to protect patrons in an interior concourse area from being struck by batted balls, or whether a “no-duty” rule for common risks of the game barred liability as a matter of law.
2. Whether Jones assumed the risk of being struck by a batted ball in the concourse such that recovery was barred as a matter of law.
3. Whether the evidence was legally insufficient to support the verdict, justifying judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV).

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania reversed the Superior Court’s entry of JNOV for the defendants.
- The Court reinstated the jury’s verdict for Jones.
- The Court held that the “no-duty” rule applicable to many seated-spectator cases did not necessarily control injuries occurring in a concourse area shaped by stadium design.
- The Court held that assumption of risk was not established as a matter of law on this record and was for the fact-finder.

## Legal Principles

- In reviewing JNOV, the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict winner; JNOV is proper only where the law permits no recovery on the record.
- The limited-duty/no-duty rule associated with the ordinary risks of baseball spectatorship (e.g., balls entering seating areas) does not automatically extend to non-seating areas where stadium architecture or traffic patterns may create or heighten risk.
- Premises operators may have a duty of reasonable care to address foreseeable hazards created by the configuration of areas under their control, including concourses with viewing openings exposed to batted balls.
- Assumption of risk requires proof that the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily encountered the specific risk that caused the injury; absent clear, undisputed evidence of such subjective awareness and acceptance, the issue is for the jury.

## Conclusion

The court reinstated a negligence verdict for a patron struck by a batted ball in a stadium concourse, holding that ordinary baseball spectator “no-duty” principles did not compel judgment for the operators given the concourse design and that assumption of risk was a jury question on the evidence presented.


Jones v. Three Rivers Mgmt. Corp., 483 Pa. 75, 394 A.2d 546 (Pa. 1978)