Ownership of a Landmark Homerun Baseball

Ownership of a Landmark Homerun Baseball

There is little confusion among the general public over who owns a homerun baseball hit into the stands at a major league baseball game. Any person who has been to a major league ballpark could tell you that a baseball hit into the stands by a batter is considered to be a souvenir for the fan lucky enough to catch it. That is the general custom of all major league ballparks and many even have signs posted informing fans that they are entitled to keep balls hit out of play either foul or as home runs. Sometimes, however, when the ball caught by a fan is of some historical importance and value the baseball team breaks its usual rule and attempts to take the ball back from the fan. When security guards swarm a fan and coerce them to hand over a valuable souvenir ball hit into the stands it is a violation of the fan's property rights over the ball in blatant violation of the long-established rules of ownership embraced by teams across major league baseball.
According to Professor Paul Finkelman, there are two legal theories that support the long-undisputed rule that a ball hit into the stands belongs to the fan that can possess it. Paul Finkelman, Fugitive Baseballs and Abandoned Property?: Who Owns a Home Run Ball, 23 CARDOZO L. REV. 1609, 1610.
Professor Finkelman says that a souvenir ball could be viewed as belonging to the fan under abandonment doctrine as well. Id. at 1618. Abandonment takes place when there is an intentional "total desertment or relinquishment" of an item by the owner. Id. (citing Ray Andrews Brown, The Law of Property 8 (Walter B. Raushenbush ed., 3 ed. 1975)). Regardless of who can be said to own a baseball the fact that when one is hit into the stands that entity rarely, if ever, attempts to collect it suggests that the ball is abandoned. See Id. at 1620-21. Also since hitting the ball is the point of the game it is clear that ball hit into the stands is intentionally abandoned. Thus, as abandoned property, the ownership of a ball hit into the stands falls to the first fan who can possess it in the stands. Indeed, a California court agreed and held that upon being hit a ball becomes intentionally abandoned property that belongs to the first fan who can become the sole possessor of the ball. Popov v. Hayashi, 2002 WL 31833731, at *3 (citing generally Finkelman, supra).
Professor Finkelman also argues that the "common law of baseball" developed over about the last 80 years where fans have been allowed to keep home run baseballs and other balls hit out of play and teams have encouraged fans to bring gloves to the park for just this purpose creates legal grounds for the theory of fan ownership. Id. at 1621-23. The last major league team to actually attempt to make fans give back ball hit into the stands was the Cleveland Indians, and the practice was so unpopular that it was short-lived. Id. at 1620. Many ball parks have signs, advertisements or announcements also encouraging fans to keep balls hit into the seats, Id. at 1621-22, and some even have rules that punish fans for attempting to throw balls hit out of play back onto the field. Id. at 1617. Based on this evidence of tradition and special custom in major league baseball, the fan is given an implied legal property interest in any ball hit in the stands which they possess. In fact, since the chance of catching a potentially valuable souvenir ball could draw a fan to buy a ticket there is a cogent argument that a fan has an implied contractual right to ownership of any souvenir ball.
Since both courts and scholars have accepted the view that a fan who takes sole possession of a ball hit into the stands gains sole property rights over that ball, any attempt to coerce such a fan to give up the ball, particularly for items of lesser value, would be illegal. In fact, Professor Finkelman examined the case of Mike Piazza's 300th home run ball. Piazza hit his 300th home run at Shea stadium while he was playing for the Mets, and a fan caught the ball and gave it to his six-year-old daughter because she was a big fan of Piazza. Id. at 1624. Stadium security immediately swarmed the two fans and demanded that they turn over the ball to Piazza. Id. The security guards promised the fans that in return they would give them the bat Piazza used to hit the home run. Id. However, the fans never got the bat. Id. The shameful act received coverage in newspaper and television media. Id. In the end, the Mets arranged for the six-year-old girl to meet Piazza, and gave her some other memorabilia of comparably inconsequential value. Id. However, according to Professor Finkelman, the fan in that case would have had a "solid case against the Mets for conversion or trespass [to chattels]." Id. at 1625.