Man Falls Asleep At MLB Game, Sues MLB For $10 Million For Noticing

from the napping-for-fun-and-profit dept

Mon, Jul 14th 2014 5:44am — Timothy Geigner

Defamation laws can be a tricky thing. Public figures, for instance, can sometimes have a tough time navigating when the law doesn't apply, while the more crazy but less famous folks of the world seem to occasionally forget that truth is a defense against defamation. Add to them the times when entire organizations forget that parody exists and is protected speech and suddenly you begin wondering whether anyone ever gets a defamation suit right.

Well, if they do, it sure ain't Andrew Robert Rector, part-time baseball fan and full-time misguided-lawsuit-filer. See, Andrew fell asleep at a Yankees/Red Sox game, and ESPN's cameras caught him snoozing. Now Andrew is suing roughly everyone for ten million dollars. Confused? You're not the only one. The at times hard to understand filing appears to be relatively unconcerned with facts, you see.

Rector claims he was filmed, and defamed, at the April 13 game between the Yankees and Red Sox, at Yankee Stadium.

"In the course of watching the game plaintiff napped and this opened unending verbal crusade against the napping plaintiff," the complaint states. ESPN focused its cameras on him, Rector says, and then "Announcers like Dan Shulman and John Kruck unleashed avalanche of disparaging words against the person of and concerning the plaintiff. These words, include but not limited to 'stupor, fatty, unintelligent, stupid' knowing and intending the same to be heard and listened to by millions of people all over the world ..."

Except, other than the camera noticing the dozing fan, none of the other accusations are even remotely accurate. For the millionth time, I find myself thanking the universe for MLB's Advanced Media, which provides video of the entire episode during the broadcast. Like I said, the complaint isn't even close to being true. The specific allegations of what the announcers said are simply wrong. They never said those things. On top of that, the complaint appears to be written by someone that needs remedial English classes, because sections of it border on incomprehensible. It even gets the names of the announcers wrong.

John Kruck [sic] in his verbal attack insinuated that the plaintiff is individual that know neither history nor understood the beauty or rivalry between Boston Red Sox and New York Yankee [sic].

And:

Plaintiff alleges that MLB.com, juxtapositions of photos and text of two men kissing each other and caption "sleeping Yankee's Fan cares not for your rivalry talk" falsely implied that plaintiff engaged in that type of conduct described or portrayed by the picture. In light of all the surrounding circumstances.

Now, that particular passage had me monumentally confused, until I read Deadspin's post about this whole situation. They're postulating that Andrew and/or his lawyers appear to be mistaking a third party for ESPN, which is about as shocking as the sun rising in the east.

That completely nonsensical paragraph seems to be referring to this blog post on NotSportsCenter.com, which has nothing to do with MLB or ESPN. But anyway, Andrew Rector wants everyone to know that he's totally not gay, bro. Stupid, maybe, but totally not gay.

Whoo-boy. In other words, in sum total, it's difficult to imagine how Andrew Rector and whatever crackerjack legal team he has hired could have screwed this up any worse. Probably best at this point to drop the whole thing and go away, particularly considering how the lawsuit has now streisanded this story and far more people are witnessing the plaintiff's actions than ever would have otherwise.

232938440 Yankee Complaint (PDF)232938440 Yankee Complaint (Text)

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: andrew rector, andrew robert rector, defamation, mlb, sleeping
Companies: mlb

41 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ninja (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 4:55am

Well, at least he is being called stupid right now so there is that to his defense. Granted he made a fool of himself and provided the Internet with an easy target but let's not be too picky with the facts, no?

Also, I think I saw Ms Streisand waving in the footage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David, 14 Jul 2014 @ 5:54am

Cough cough
On top of that, the complaint appears to be written by someone that needs remedial English classes, because sections of it border on incomprehensible.

You probably mean "who needs remedial English classes", and "border on being incomprehensible" or "border on the incomprehensible".

Of course, it is the irony of grammar flames that they will contain several errors themselves. I have little doubt that my comment will prove no exception to this rule.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mcinsand, 14 Jul 2014 @ 5:57am

I would expect the lawsuit to go the other way
I'm surprised of the direction that the lawsuit is taking. If anything, I would have expected the MLB to sue Rector and the broadcast network for exposing the fact that MLB is boring. They couldn't exactly sue for defamation; after all, you aren't defaming anyone if you simply expose the facts. However, given the onerous terms of the entertainment industry's contracts, I'm sure that the contract was broken in multiple ways.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2014 @ 5:59am

Re:
Calling someone "stupid" is not defamation under any circumstances.
If it was, lawyers would line schoolyards and playgrounds waiting for clients.

All this idiot is doing is creating another classic example of the "Streisand Effect".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 6:15am

Re: Cough cough
I, four won, like it when my crappy grammer gets pointed out in. That's how i become better at righting....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 6:16am

And this is fall out from everyone gets a ribbon & nothing you do is ever your fault.

He goes to event, sleeps.
In his rage over people noticing him in a public place where he agreed to be on camera (read your ticket dummy), he decided that everyone who said anything about him had to be the people with the deep pockets who could undo his impotent rage.

He lies about facts in the complaint, and even a casual observer can find that the really bad statements are not coming from the talking heads on tv.

One wonders if in his zeal to "defend" himself, he made that genius mistep of answering people on YouTube and the like and, to use a happy phrase, 'stuck his dick in a hornet's nest and was shocked to learn he got stung'.

He should have to pay the legal fees of anyone who bothers to show up to answer this idiocy, the lawyer should be sanctioned for bringing a meritless case as well as lying to the court. Oh and for giggles, they should ban him from attending these events in the future to avoid him getting his feelings hurt in the future.

You thought the public mocking was bad before?
Lets see how much the Streisand Effect can multiply your tears.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 6:17am

Re: Re: Cough cough
Use my excuse, my first language is lolcat.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 6:18am

Re: Re: Cough cough
Honest foreigner question: is it ok to use that instead of who in cases like this one?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2014 @ 6:27am

Re: Cough cough
Don't get upset, he's just a 13 year old Ukrainian boy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 6:37am

Re: Re: Re: Cough cough
Go for it, unless you plan to work at a dead-tree newspaper. Grammar is important, but the more important issue is to make yourself and your ideas understood. Even if your sentence structure is grammatically correct, if your idea is vague or empty it is worth nothing. If what you are saying is important: say it in the simplest way possible that accurately conveys the idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2014 @ 6:56am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Cough cough
While I try not to be a grammar Nazi I get really annoyed when I see people confuse lose and loose. I see it all the time on the Internet and sometimes the same comment will use the wrong one several times. It's reaching the point where I stopped correcting it with a follow up comment. Come on people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Donglebert The Needlessly Unready, 14 Jul 2014 @ 6:59am

Re: Re: Re: Cough cough
It's absolutely ok and perfectly correct to use "that" in such cases. The need for "who" when referring to people is a myth.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2014 @ 6:59am

Well this is one way to get world famous, for a short time. While MLB announcers probably didn't do what he claimed because they are being broadcast, the same may possibly not be said for radio and independent broadcasters. Who friggin' knows?

For certain, this Andrew character doesn't know. Crap he was asleep at the time, which might account for his wildly inaccurate accusations.

Evidently Andrew has plenty of money so I'll lend him some free advice.

Anyone that has money to burn can easily find someone to tend the fire.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
James T (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 7:04am

Portion of the Ad profits
I think there is an important distinction here that the videos were not just used for news. They provided peak views and ad revenue over this whole situation. IMO it's not crazy to think that he has some level of interest in that ad revenue. If this was a paid actor then he would have to sign a release. Since he's suing I assume he didn't sign a release.

I don't like it but I can see that there might be a money grab somewhere in this complaint.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Donglebert The Needlessly Unready, 14 Jul 2014 @ 7:10am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Cough cough
And, equally, there is nothing wrong with "border on incomprehensible". There's no need for two verbs - to border works happily enough on its own when followed by a predicative.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Donglebert The Needlessly Unready, 14 Jul 2014 @ 7:17am

Re: Portion of the Ad profits
That's stretching it.

Even if it's not on the ticket terms (which it often is), he's paid to go to an event that he knew was being filmed. That would come under fair use, I believe.

And then, since he's made a news story out of it, the image of him sleeping can now be used under fair use.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Reality bites, 14 Jul 2014 @ 7:22am

Forrest Gump: My mama says that stupid is as stupid does.
Isn't the world a wonderful place someone as stupid as him can find a equally stupid lawyer so they can waste legit businesses time and money.

Take the moron, the moron lawyer and the biggest moron of all the drooler judge and deport them to saudi arabia.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 7:24am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Cough cough
Thanks, and thanks all who replied (or that replied lmao).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
scotts13 (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 7:37am

A confused time sense
Andrew Robert Rector, it would seem, suffers from the Billy Pilgrim Syndrome; he's come loose in time. He he's suing because people were calling him an idiot, but people are calling him an idiot because he's suing. He'll be stuck in a time loop forever, and the rest of us will be lucky not to be sucked in.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Avatar28 (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 7:46am

Re:
>the lawyer should be sanctioned for bringing a meritless case as well as lying to the court

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say he probably filed pro se.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Adam (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 7:56am

Please post what they did say, not what they didn't say.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2014 @ 8:10am

Re: I would expect the lawsuit to go the other way
Reminds me of that classic simpsons episode..."I never realized how boring this game is."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sorrykb (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 8:14am

Not pro se
I was hoping that he was representing himself, but the Courthouse News Service article states:
He is represented by Valentine Okwara, of Jamaica, N.Y.

The article also notes (in a very generous understatement:
The writing style of the lawsuit is idiosyncratic.

(Now watch as he sues Courthouse News Service for pointing that out.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sorrykb (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 8:17am

Re: Not pro se
Ack! An unclosed parenthetical expression! (Yes, Grammar Nazis, I noticed it immediately upon hitting "submit".)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
weneedhelp (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 8:21am

Re:
"I find myself thanking the universe for MLB's Advanced Media, which provides video of the entire episode during the broadcast."
http://m.mlb.com/video/v32071463/bosnyy-fan-sleeps-in-stands-during-game-vs-red-sox
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WysiWyg (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 8:24am

Re:
They mostly advertised their streaming offers and wondered how he slept through the crowd screaming earlier. Also some musings about the guy next to him.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mcherm (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 9:27am

Re: Forrest Gump: My mama says that stupid is as stupid does.
> Take the moron, the moron lawyer and the biggest moron of all the drooler judge and deport them to saudi arabia.

You aren't being fair here. The judge doesn't have anything to do with this: lawsuits are filed with the clerk of the court, and it's quite possible a judge hasn't even been ASSIGNED yet; certainly the judge cannot dismiss the case until it comes into court.

Also it's not fair to Saudi Arabia.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ryuugami, 14 Jul 2014 @ 9:44am

Re: Re: Not pro se
Well close it then!
Here, I'll do it for you: )

"(An unmatched left parenthesis creates an unresolved tension that will stay with you all day. " - xkcd

...

)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
James T (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 9:58am

Re: Re: Portion of the Ad profits
I agree it's a big stretch. The things is the MLB is notorious for claiming control and ownership, to have that I'm sure they opened themselves up a bit legally for this. It sounds like this guy has no chance. Courts usually don't like it when filings from the lawyers don't make sense. It has a tendency to cause summary judgements.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sorrykb (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 10:15am

Re: Re: Re: Not pro se
Thank you. That's much better.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DogBreath, 14 Jul 2014 @ 10:55am

Re:
(read your ticket dummy),

made me think of this:

Fred Sanford Dummy Reel

After it is over, the guy filing the lawsuit should be legally required by the court to change his name to Lamont Sanford, as a warning to others that a "Big Dummy" is in there presence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DogBreath, 14 Jul 2014 @ 10:56am

Re: Re:
*their
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 12:42pm

Re: Re:
TIIIIIIIIIMBER!!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 12:45pm

Re: Portion of the Ad profits
What is the value of 'idiot sleeping at a sporting event' in the ad market?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Padpaw (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 1:20pm

Another proud moment in the sue happy history of America
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 2:35pm

Re:
Oh and for giggles, they should ban him from attending these events in the future to avoid him getting his feelings hurt in the future.

Really, that should be the standard response anytime someone sues a business. Most businesses tend to have a 'We reserve the right to refuse service to-' clause, and while refusing service to some groups could get you in hot water, 'We refuse to serve him/her because we don't feel like getting sued again' seems like something that a judge would accept.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 2:39pm

Re: Re: Portion of the Ad profits
'Our games are so boring, we even have people falling asleep in the stands during them!'

Yeah, I'm not really seeing much PR value there , unless it's for an energy drink company I suppose.

'... so make sure to pick up our awesome energy drink at the concessions stand so you can make it through the game!'
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kronomex, 14 Jul 2014 @ 8:31pm

One word for this man: idiot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2014 @ 10:59pm

Re: Re:
Baseball is so boring I wonder how anyone can stay awake
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Jul 2014 @ 11:10pm

Re: Re:
It always boils down to the reason why they decide not to.
Jackass isn't a protected class, so he is fair game :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Killing My Career (profile), 15 Jul 2014 @ 12:54am

Shocked he didn't list some medical conditions like sleep apnea or narcolepsy to bolster his claims.
[ link to this | view in thread ]