On May 22, Darin Ruf, a former utility player for the Milwaukee Brewers and several other clubs, sued the Cincinnati Reds based on an allegedly career-ending knee injury that Mr. Ruf suffered at the Reds’ Great American Ball Park on June 2, 2023.

Mr. Ruf injured his knee when he was chasing a foul ball down the first base line and ran into the end of the rolled-up tarp. According to Mr. Ruf, the tarp was not properly padded.

Mr. Ruf’s case is the latest in a series of cases brought by players in Major League Baseball and the National Football League concerning injuries suffered due to field conditions. The lawsuits have had a mixed record of success: The leagues argue that the lawsuits are preempted by the collective bargaining agreements with the players unions.

The preemption playbook

All of the major American sports leagues have negotiated comprehensive collective bargaining agreements that address a wide range of issues affecting the terms and conditions of employment for the players. Those agreements also require a confidential arbitration process in the case of any dispute as to whether the league, a club, a union, or a player abided by their obligations under the agreement. As a result, in each league, dozens of grievances are commenced and resolved each year, typically without any awareness on the part of the public.

Nonetheless, players have occasionally brought lawsuits in court against leagues or clubs based on conduct that they argue is not covered by the agreement. The leagues and clubs generally ask the courts to dismiss the lawsuits, arguing that claims are preempted by the agreement under the federal Labor Management Relations Act. In other words, the leagues and clubs contend that the players cannot sue them in court over any alleged breach of the agreement. Even the NFL Players Association has taken a broad view in favor of the preemption argument.

In the 1985 case of Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck, the U.S. Supreme Court established the controlling principle on this issue, holding that claims whose resolution is “substantially dependent upon analysis of the terms of” a collective bargaining agreement are preempted. If the claims are “inextricably intertwined” with the terms and provisions of the agreement, they cannot proceed and must be brought pursuant to the arbitration provisions contained in the agreement. 

The intended and frequent result is the dismissal of the claims that were filed in court.

Preemption in practice

The cases that have presented the most difficulty for leagues (and courts) are those like Mr. Ruf’s, where a player has alleged an injury resulting from negligently maintained field conditions.

One of the most well-known cases concerns former NFL running back Reggie Bush.  In 2016, Mr. Bush sued the St. Louis Rams and their stadium authority when, at the conclusion of a play, he injured his knee when he slipped and fell on a concrete surface surrounding the turf playing field.  A federal judge rejected the Rams’ arguments that Mr. Bush’s claims were preempted by the collective bargaining agreement. Although at the time the NFL and Players Association had a “Joint Committee for the purpose of discussing, among other things, the player safety and welfare aspects of playing equipment, playing surfaces, and stadium facilities[,]” according to the judge, “[t]he Joint Committee d[id] not have the power to commit or bind any of the signatories to the [agreement]… nor does the [agreement] establish a contractually agreed upon standard of care applicable to Plaintiff's claims.” 

In 2020, a jury awarded Mr. Bush $12.5 million for the injury, which effectively ended his career.

A similar decision was reached the following year in a case brought by then-Philadelphia Eagles player and now Houston Texans head coach DeMeco Ryans after Mr. Ryans injured his Achilles tendon due to what he alleged was a dangerous playing surface at the Texans’ NRG Stadium. A Texas state court held that it was not necessary to analyze the collective bargaining agreement to evaluate Mr. Ryans’ negligence claim. As a result, the claim was not preempted.

Whether in response to these legal losses or not, the NFL changed some of its practices, seemingly to avoid similar litigation in the future. As part of the 2020 collective bargaining agreement, the NFL and the Players Association added a section establishing and discussing the responsibilities of the joint NFL-Union Field Surface Safety & Performance Committee. That Committee is responsible for establishing and enforcing playing field standards, codified as the Field Surface Manual. 

The scope of the Committee was relevant in a 2023 lawsuit brought by former Denver Broncos linebacker Aaron Patrick. During the Monday Night Football game between the Broncos and Los Angeles Chargers on October 17, 2022, Mr. Patrick, after trying to make a tackle near the sideline on a punt, tripped over television cables and mats and collided with the NFL’s television liaison, the person responsible for coordinating commercial breaks. Unfortunately, Mr. Patrick, an undrafted second-year player, tore his anterior cruciate ligament (better known as “ACL”) in the process. Mr. Patrick recovered and participated in the Broncos’ training camp the next year, but he did not make the team.

Mr. Patrick sued the NFL, ESPN, the Chargers, the entities that own and operate SoFi Stadium, and others, in California state court for negligence and premises liability. A federal court granted a motion to dismiss by the NFL and the Chargers based on preemption, holding that “resolution of Patrick’s claims, and specifically determination of the scope of each defendant’s duty and potential liability, would require interpretation of the [collective bargaining agreement],” including the Field Surface Manual. 

Baseball too has faced such cases. In June 2017, in the first inning of his Major League debut, New York Yankees’ outfielder Dexter Fowler injured his knee when it hit a metal electrical box along the right field wall in foul territory at the Chicago White Sox’s Guaranteed Rate Field. Mr. Fowler sued the Illinois Sports Facility Authority, which managed the stadium, and the White Sox, for alleged negligence. 

The defendants sought to have the case dismissed based on preemption. Specifically, they argued that Mr. Fowler’s claim required interpretation of Article XIII of the agreement between MLB and the MLB Players Association, which established a joint Safety and Health Advisory Committee “to deal with emergency safety and health problems as they arise” and “to engage in review of, planning for and maintenance of safe and healthful working conditions for Players.” 

An Illinois federal judge was not persuaded. He held that Article XIII “leaves no doubt that the clubs were in a vastly better position than the Committee to assess the safety of their own premises.  [Moreover,] [t]he clubs did not give up any control over their premises to the Committee, nor did they even grant it any consistent supervisory role.” In sum, the judge concluded that he did not need to consult the collective bargaining agreement to evaluate the club’s duty of care to Mr. Fowler and therefore that Mr. Fowler’s claims were not preempted. The parties subsequently settled.

The Reds’ at bat

The Reds are likely to seek dismissal of Mr. Ruf’s lawsuit based on preemption. They face an uphill battle in light of the Dexter Fowler decision, even though that decision was issued by a federal judge in Illinois and the Reds are suing in Ohio state court. The 2022 agreement between MLB and the Players Association did not add any field safety obligations for either party. 

Should the Ruf case proceed, the Reds would have to evaluate whether its employees were in fact negligent in rolling and covering up the tarp and all of its parts. Negligence claims typically have to be decided by a jury. Were the case to make it to a jury, the Reds would face significant financial risk. Although Mr. Ruf was 37 years old at the time of the injury, he had a $3 million salary in 2023, and thus any lost earnings would still have been significant (an issue frequently faced by doctors accused by athletes of medical malpractice).

Expect the Reds to take a swing at the preemption argument first. If they miss, the club (and its insurer) are likely to try to settle rather than serving up a home run during a jury trial.