Should an athlete who intentionally injures another during a game face criminal or civil charges?

Question

Yes or No.
Why?

Add laws applicable to support your answer.

Answer 1

This has already been litigated, and the answer is NO. The reason is a simple tort theory called "Assumption of Risk." Basically, when athletes play sports they are aware of the risk of injury - both intention and accidental - and they choose to play anyway. By choosing to play, they assume the risk and therefore bear the burden of any injury they receive.
New York has a case on point that explains this theory very well:

Morgan v. State, 90 N.Y.2d 471, 483-84, 662 N.Y.S.2d 421, 685 N.E.2d 202 (1997)

Answer 2

It depends what you mean by "intentionally injure."

If it is something that is within the accepted customs of the game, then there is no civil or criminal liability. Legally, it is considered implied consent. When you participate in an athletic contest, you consent to all manner of roughness and violence that is within the rules and customs of the game.

However, intentional violence that is clearly beyond what is customary of the particular sport is actionable civilly and criminally.

Example: Intentionally beaning a batter, causing injury, is not actionable. Beaning a batter is against the rules of baseball, but throwing bean balls is a generally accepted custom of baseball, and is to be expected by anyone participating in a baseball game.

Intentionally whacking the first baseman with a bat while rounding the bases would be actionable. Carrying a bat and hitting opposing players is not an accepted custom of baseball.

The Morgan v. State case that Cyanne cited is a bad example. Morgan had to do with a bobsledder who was injured due to a negligently designed bobsled track. By definition, negligence is unintentional. There was no intentional attempt to injure Morgan.

A better example is Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals 601 F.2d 516 (1979), which is all over the internet. During a game, Hackbart, following his team's interception of a pass, took a knee to watch the remainder of the play, which had already progressed downfield. An opposing player gave Hackbart, still kneeling, a forearm blow to Hackbart's head. The court ruled that such conduct is clearly out of bounds, even for a sport as violent as football, and Hackbart had a viable civil claim for battery.

Answer 3

Yes, he or she could face both criminal and civil charges for assault or battery. When you participate in competitive sports, there is an implied assumption of risk of related injuries. But the key word in your question is "intentional." There is no assumption of risk when the conduct is intentional or outside the scope of the risk of the sport.

Answer 4

no cuz its contained in the sport... to a certain degree like if someone came up to another baseball player at a game and hit them with a bat i think there would be legal actions taken

Answer 5

Yes. It is assault. There are laws against assaulting someone with the intent to injury them.

Answer 6

Intent can be litigated in civil court.