Misrepresentation of Baseball Bat Weight Sparks Class Action Suit

Easton Baseball / Softball, Inc. is a top manufacturer of baseball and softball products, has been subjected to a class action suit filed in United States District Court for the Central District of California. After discovering that the baseball bat he purchased for his son was heavier than advertised, plaintiff Ricky Wisdom is seeking to stop the sale of incorrectly weighted bats and recover damages for consumers paying a premium for Easton’s products.

Easton has acquired a strong reputation in the sporting goods industry for selling premium equipment, including high-end baseball and softball bats. The company’s new bat models are sold for around $350 and are highly popular among players of all ages. Wisdom’s claim is focused on youth models, noting that parents of middle-school aged children often seek out Easton products because of their perceived reliability.

According to Wisdom, Easton youth bats are more than an ounce heavier than advertised on average, which can have a significant impact on the performance of the player and the equipment. Bat Digest, an independent organization, published a report concluding that various sizes of Easton bats weighed more than advertised.  The report showed that Easton bats consistently exceeded their stated weight by between 0.5 and 2 ounces.

The plaintiff is arguing that a bat which is heavier than expected can negatively affect a player and cause injuries to players and spectators. Swinging a heavier bat can strain an athlete’s body, inhibiting the ability to train or perform properly while potentially leading to injury, according to Wisdom. Additionally, Wisdom alleges that a heavy bat can lead to baseballs being hit with an unexpected amount of force, exceeding the bounds of youth-sized fields and potentially harming other players or spectators.

Wisdom is seeking to represent a nationwide class of buyers of Easton products, who he alleges are entitled to damages based on violations of state laws, breaches of express and implied warranties, and claims of unjust enrichment (Ricky Wisdom v. Easton Baseball / Softball, Inc. et al, Case No. 2:18-CV-04078).

Leave a Reply

Next ArticleNCAA’s Response to Legal Gambling: Rule Changes and Support for Federal Regulation