Martin Love, 76, Was Attending an Atlanta Braves Game

Martin Love, 76, was attending an Atlanta Braves game. After a Braves player hit a home run, Atlanta's mascot, Homer the Brace, entered the field of play and began firing T-shirts into the stands with an air cannon. One of the rolled shirts, wrapped with 2 strips of masking tape, struck Love in the left eye and knocked him out. Love stated he was not paying attention to Homer at the moment he was struck by the projectile because he was watching the players in the dug-out celebrate the home run. Love sued the Atlanta Braves for $75,000 in damages as he claimed he sustained permanent eye damage when he was struck. Love's lawyer noted that getting struck by a foul ball is an inherent risk of baseball and a risk spectators assume at a baseball game, but not getting struck by a flying T-shirt. What duty is owed to Mr. Love and should the stadium be liable for injuries to Mr. Love due to the mascot's distracting behavior during the game or the type of promotional activity involved? Specifically discuss the "status" of the guests and the scope of duties owed, if any. You should specifically discuss how the following defenses/exceptions would be applied in this situation: Inherent Risk, Limited Duty Rule, Distraction Doctrine. All relevant cases from your text should be integrated into your analysis.