1
00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:07,000
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosseo from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:08,520 --> 00:00:12,760
Speaker 2: President Donald Trump has once again suggested he'd like to

3
00:00:12,840 --> 00:00:17,040
Speaker 2: extend his stay at sixteen hundred Pennsylvania Avenue for a

4
00:00:17,120 --> 00:00:18,040
Speaker 2: third term.

5
00:00:18,320 --> 00:00:21,360
Speaker 3: I would love to do it. I have my best numbers.

6
00:00:21,360 --> 00:00:23,320
Speaker 4: Ever, it's very terrible. I have my best snubber.

7
00:00:23,520 --> 00:00:26,440
Speaker 2: Trump has frequently flirted with the idea of a third

8
00:00:26,560 --> 00:00:29,240
Speaker 2: term while saying he doesn't want to talk about it.

9
00:00:29,520 --> 00:00:32,680
Speaker 2: For example, in March, just a little over a month

10
00:00:32,800 --> 00:00:35,360
Speaker 2: into his second term, I want to talk about it.

11
00:00:35,440 --> 00:00:36,279
Speaker 3: I'm just telling you.

12
00:00:36,320 --> 00:00:40,840
Speaker 2: I have had more people say please run again. I said,

13
00:00:40,880 --> 00:00:42,640
Speaker 2: we have a long way to go before we even

14
00:00:42,680 --> 00:00:43,320
Speaker 2: think about that.

15
00:00:44,640 --> 00:00:46,440
Speaker 5: They do say there's a way you can do it.

16
00:00:46,479 --> 00:00:47,639
Speaker 4: But I don't know about that.

17
00:00:47,680 --> 00:00:48,879
Speaker 5: But I have not looked into it.

18
00:00:49,040 --> 00:00:52,520
Speaker 2: But this time. There are also those Trump twenty twenty

19
00:00:52,560 --> 00:00:55,840
Speaker 2: eight red baseball caps that sat on his desk during

20
00:00:55,840 --> 00:00:59,320
Speaker 2: a meeting with congressional leaders this month. There's the think

21
00:00:59,400 --> 00:01:02,960
Speaker 2: tank call called Third Term Project. And there is the

22
00:01:03,120 --> 00:01:06,880
Speaker 2: Justice Department lawyer who, during oral arguments at the Sixth

23
00:01:06,920 --> 00:01:10,839
Speaker 2: Circuit Court of Appeals referred to a new administration being

24
00:01:10,880 --> 00:01:15,000
Speaker 2: in place quote three years in the future or seven

25
00:01:15,080 --> 00:01:18,440
Speaker 2: years in the future. Joining me is constitutional law expert

26
00:01:18,520 --> 00:01:22,160
Speaker 2: David Super, a professor at Georgetown Law. So, David, I

27
00:01:22,200 --> 00:01:26,680
Speaker 2: reread the twenty second Amendment. It plainly states that no

28
00:01:26,720 --> 00:01:29,360
Speaker 2: one can be elected president more than twice. I mean,

29
00:01:29,400 --> 00:01:32,400
Speaker 2: how plain is it? How clear is it?

30
00:01:32,400 --> 00:01:35,759
Speaker 3: It could not be clearer and it could not be plainer.

31
00:01:36,319 --> 00:01:39,960
Speaker 3: It's short, it's sweet, it's to the point, and they

32
00:01:40,000 --> 00:01:43,720
Speaker 3: are not allowing anyone to run for a third term.

33
00:01:44,120 --> 00:01:48,760
Speaker 2: Now, there are different kinds of scenarios out there that

34
00:01:48,920 --> 00:01:52,360
Speaker 2: Trump allies have put forward. One of the arguments is

35
00:01:52,440 --> 00:01:55,880
Speaker 2: that the twenty second Amendment only explicitly bars a person

36
00:01:55,920 --> 00:01:59,680
Speaker 2: from being elected to more than two presidential terms, but

37
00:01:59,680 --> 00:02:04,080
Speaker 2: doesn't say anything about serving a third term. So the

38
00:02:04,080 --> 00:02:08,560
Speaker 2: theory is that Trump could run as vice president and

39
00:02:08,680 --> 00:02:12,720
Speaker 2: then have whatever lucky candidate for president it is resign

40
00:02:12,880 --> 00:02:14,919
Speaker 2: and then Trump takes the White House.

41
00:02:15,480 --> 00:02:18,520
Speaker 4: That doesn't work either, because of the twelfth Amendment, which

42
00:02:18,560 --> 00:02:23,119
Speaker 4: says that any candidate for vice president must be constitutionally

43
00:02:23,200 --> 00:02:27,560
Speaker 4: qualified to serve as president, which mister Trump isn't.

44
00:02:28,480 --> 00:02:32,880
Speaker 2: In fact, Trump himself sort of dismissed that he said

45
00:02:32,919 --> 00:02:35,520
Speaker 2: I'd be allowed to do that, but I think people

46
00:02:35,600 --> 00:02:40,359
Speaker 2: wouldn't like that. It's too cute. Also, didn't Vladimir Putin

47
00:02:40,440 --> 00:02:43,000
Speaker 2: sort of do something like that years ago where he

48
00:02:43,720 --> 00:02:46,560
Speaker 2: put a deputy in to serve in his place for

49
00:02:46,760 --> 00:02:48,400
Speaker 2: one term and then he took over.

50
00:02:49,760 --> 00:02:53,280
Speaker 4: It's rather disappointing that this country is taking its political

51
00:02:53,360 --> 00:02:57,080
Speaker 4: lessons from Russia these days. But yes, what Putin did

52
00:02:57,800 --> 00:03:02,320
Speaker 4: was stepped down from being president for one term and

53
00:03:02,639 --> 00:03:08,359
Speaker 4: let a trusted ally of his serve as a figurehead

54
00:03:08,440 --> 00:03:12,560
Speaker 4: president while Putin ran things as Prime minister, then came

55
00:03:12,639 --> 00:03:16,320
Speaker 4: back and became president again. A few problems with that.

56
00:03:16,560 --> 00:03:20,079
Speaker 4: One is it's too cute. Two is we don't have

57
00:03:20,480 --> 00:03:25,079
Speaker 4: prime ministerships here, so there's no obvious alternate role for

58
00:03:25,160 --> 00:03:28,800
Speaker 4: Trump to go into to serve it. Three, Russia's limit

59
00:03:28,880 --> 00:03:32,360
Speaker 4: is on consecutive terms. The twenty second Amendment is a

60
00:03:32,440 --> 00:03:35,680
Speaker 4: limit on total terms. And four, why are we taking

61
00:03:35,720 --> 00:03:37,440
Speaker 4: our political lessons from Russia?

62
00:03:37,480 --> 00:03:40,480
Speaker 2: And just explain to get rid of the twenty second Amendment?

63
00:03:40,480 --> 00:03:41,240
Speaker 2: What would it take?

64
00:03:41,600 --> 00:03:44,680
Speaker 4: Repealing the twenty second Amendment would take a two thirds

65
00:03:44,800 --> 00:03:50,600
Speaker 4: vote from both chambers of Congress and ratification by three

66
00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:53,840
Speaker 4: quarters of the states, which is thirty eight states, so

67
00:03:54,000 --> 00:03:59,520
Speaker 4: you would need ratification from states like Connecticut and Massachusetts.

68
00:04:00,080 --> 00:04:01,720
Speaker 4: Now I don't think those states are going to be

69
00:04:01,760 --> 00:04:04,480
Speaker 4: working very hard to get mister Trump a third term.

70
00:04:04,840 --> 00:04:08,280
Speaker 2: Another theory is that Trump could become the Speaker of

71
00:04:08,320 --> 00:04:11,760
Speaker 2: the House, which apparently posits that it's easy to be

72
00:04:11,800 --> 00:04:14,560
Speaker 2: elected Speaker of the House, and then if both the

73
00:04:14,600 --> 00:04:18,400
Speaker 2: president and vice president, who would have to be Trump

74
00:04:18,480 --> 00:04:20,000
Speaker 2: Ally's resign.

75
00:04:20,520 --> 00:04:20,719
Speaker 3: Yeah.

76
00:04:20,720 --> 00:04:23,000
Speaker 4: I keep sending in my resume to be Speaker of

77
00:04:23,040 --> 00:04:25,800
Speaker 4: the House and nothing ever happens. I'm not sure what

78
00:04:25,880 --> 00:04:31,120
Speaker 4: the problem is in theory that could be said to

79
00:04:31,160 --> 00:04:35,680
Speaker 4: be valid. The Speaker of the House is elected, and

80
00:04:36,320 --> 00:04:39,640
Speaker 4: if the purpose of electing mister Trump speaker is to

81
00:04:39,680 --> 00:04:42,719
Speaker 4: make him president, I think there's an argument that that

82
00:04:42,800 --> 00:04:48,360
Speaker 4: would also violate the twenty second Amendment of the Contitution.

83
00:04:48,480 --> 00:04:51,680
Speaker 4: But it certainly puts a thumb in the eye of

84
00:04:52,040 --> 00:04:56,520
Speaker 4: popular intent. We had had a four term president, President Roosevelt.

85
00:04:57,080 --> 00:05:00,760
Speaker 4: The country across all political lines can included that that

86
00:05:00,920 --> 00:05:04,080
Speaker 4: was too much power for any individual to have, that

87
00:05:04,160 --> 00:05:08,680
Speaker 4: it resembled authoritarian countries too much, and we decided we

88
00:05:08,760 --> 00:05:12,280
Speaker 4: didn't want to do that anymore. And this is yet

89
00:05:12,320 --> 00:05:18,640
Speaker 4: again mister Trump and his allies disregarding the people's choice

90
00:05:18,640 --> 00:05:19,680
Speaker 4: through their constitution.

91
00:05:20,240 --> 00:05:22,960
Speaker 2: Have you heard any other theories of how he could

92
00:05:23,000 --> 00:05:25,840
Speaker 2: become president for a third term and then the other one.

93
00:05:25,839 --> 00:05:28,479
Speaker 4: I guess it's very straightforward. Just do it and see

94
00:05:28,480 --> 00:05:33,039
Speaker 4: if anyone stops you. And this Supreme Court has been

95
00:05:33,720 --> 00:05:41,240
Speaker 4: willing to avoid a number of constitutional violations and most

96
00:05:41,320 --> 00:05:46,880
Speaker 4: obviously declining to consider or allow anyone else to consider

97
00:05:47,200 --> 00:05:52,320
Speaker 4: whether mister Trump was disqualified under the insurrection clause of

98
00:05:52,360 --> 00:05:55,960
Speaker 4: the fourteenth Amendment. He may just take the position that

99
00:05:56,040 --> 00:05:58,599
Speaker 4: he can run, he can do it, and he doesn't

100
00:05:58,640 --> 00:05:59,960
Speaker 4: think anyone will stop him.

101
00:06:00,120 --> 00:06:03,440
Speaker 2: I guess this is hopeful in a sense, because he's

102
00:06:03,440 --> 00:06:06,920
Speaker 2: still talking about running and having an election rather than

103
00:06:07,040 --> 00:06:08,880
Speaker 2: just staying in office.

104
00:06:09,400 --> 00:06:14,000
Speaker 4: Well, there has been talk in the past that he

105
00:06:14,480 --> 00:06:18,800
Speaker 4: might do something like what you're suggesting. He made some

106
00:06:18,880 --> 00:06:24,440
Speaker 4: comments about that in twenty twenty, which I hope were

107
00:06:24,480 --> 00:06:27,719
Speaker 4: not taken very seriously. Certainly didn't deserve to be taken

108
00:06:27,920 --> 00:06:32,440
Speaker 4: very seriously. But some of his supporters have suggested that

109
00:06:32,560 --> 00:06:36,159
Speaker 4: he could somehow declare some kind of a state of emergency.

110
00:06:37,080 --> 00:06:41,240
Speaker 4: Someone called it a sovereignty crisis and suspend elections on

111
00:06:41,320 --> 00:06:45,920
Speaker 4: that basis, there's no authority whatsoever in the Constitution for that,

112
00:06:46,120 --> 00:06:48,600
Speaker 4: So if he were to do that, he would effectively

113
00:06:48,960 --> 00:06:50,760
Speaker 4: be repudiating the Constitution.

114
00:06:51,440 --> 00:06:53,880
Speaker 2: And you think that the Supreme Court might not even

115
00:06:54,000 --> 00:06:57,880
Speaker 2: step in if he decides to run for a third term.

116
00:06:58,320 --> 00:07:01,640
Speaker 4: No, I think they would. I think this Court is

117
00:07:02,279 --> 00:07:06,440
Speaker 4: hoping against hope that he won't force their hand by

118
00:07:06,440 --> 00:07:11,720
Speaker 4: doing something completely delegitimizing. But I don't believe that there

119
00:07:11,760 --> 00:07:15,760
Speaker 4: are five justices who have so totally lost faith in

120
00:07:15,800 --> 00:07:17,400
Speaker 4: the country that they would put up with that.

121
00:07:17,800 --> 00:07:20,960
Speaker 2: I mean, it could be he's trolling the Democrats, he's

122
00:07:21,200 --> 00:07:24,040
Speaker 2: entertaining his base, he doesn't want to look like a

123
00:07:24,160 --> 00:07:26,920
Speaker 2: lame duck, or he just wants to continue to be

124
00:07:26,960 --> 00:07:29,200
Speaker 2: the center of attention with this speculation.

125
00:07:30,080 --> 00:07:33,560
Speaker 4: Yes, I think so. Presidents have often had a lot

126
00:07:33,600 --> 00:07:38,680
Speaker 4: of trouble in their second terms in office. President Reagan

127
00:07:39,080 --> 00:07:43,760
Speaker 4: was unstoppable in his first term and stumbled quite badly

128
00:07:43,840 --> 00:07:48,520
Speaker 4: in his second. President Bush was very strong in his

129
00:07:48,560 --> 00:07:53,240
Speaker 4: first and got the Great Recession and Hurricane Katrina in

130
00:07:53,360 --> 00:07:57,080
Speaker 4: the second. President Obama lost all kinds of esteem by

131
00:07:57,080 --> 00:08:00,400
Speaker 4: his second term, And I think President Trump does want

132
00:08:00,400 --> 00:08:03,160
Speaker 4: to follow that example and was.

133
00:08:03,080 --> 00:08:06,960
Speaker 2: It President Reagan who suggested getting rid of the twenty

134
00:08:07,000 --> 00:08:07,679
Speaker 2: second Amendment.

135
00:08:08,320 --> 00:08:08,800
Speaker 3: He did.

136
00:08:08,880 --> 00:08:13,360
Speaker 4: I'm not sure how seriously. A number of presidents get

137
00:08:13,720 --> 00:08:16,400
Speaker 4: fond of the job and start thinking that the twenty

138
00:08:16,440 --> 00:08:19,440
Speaker 4: second Amendment is a bad idea, but I don't think

139
00:08:19,480 --> 00:08:22,920
Speaker 4: anyone took him very seriously or move very far with it,

140
00:08:23,400 --> 00:08:27,080
Speaker 4: in part because President Reagan was already quite a fan stage.

141
00:08:27,640 --> 00:08:30,040
Speaker 4: Of course, President Trump is much older.

142
00:08:30,080 --> 00:08:33,520
Speaker 2: And Trump would be the oldest president in history by

143
00:08:33,559 --> 00:08:36,400
Speaker 2: the time he leaves office, assuming, of course, that he

144
00:08:36,480 --> 00:08:39,520
Speaker 2: leaves at the end of his second term. Trump has

145
00:08:39,559 --> 00:08:44,960
Speaker 2: already done so much to expand his presidential authority. It's

146
00:08:45,000 --> 00:08:48,080
Speaker 2: not even a year into his second term. He's used

147
00:08:48,080 --> 00:08:52,720
Speaker 2: the specter of emergencies to impose tariffs, to send the

148
00:08:52,760 --> 00:08:57,560
Speaker 2: military into democratic led cities, and to shoot at supposed

149
00:08:57,640 --> 00:09:01,840
Speaker 2: Venezuelan drug runners at see. Have you ever seen a

150
00:09:01,880 --> 00:09:06,880
Speaker 2: president in these circumstances of peacetime exercised so much power,

151
00:09:07,320 --> 00:09:08,640
Speaker 2: often using the military.

152
00:09:09,120 --> 00:09:13,680
Speaker 4: Now, there's nothing remotely close to this. Richard Dixon was accused,

153
00:09:13,720 --> 00:09:18,120
Speaker 4: with some justification of trying to build an imperial presidency,

154
00:09:18,400 --> 00:09:21,720
Speaker 4: but I can't think of anything that mister Nixon tried

155
00:09:21,760 --> 00:09:24,680
Speaker 4: to do that mister Trump hasn't done much more of

156
00:09:25,280 --> 00:09:27,400
Speaker 4: And I can think of many things that mister Trump

157
00:09:27,480 --> 00:09:30,760
Speaker 4: has done that mister Nixon never dreamed of doing. President

158
00:09:31,080 --> 00:09:35,080
Speaker 4: Lincoln used a great many powers during the Civil War,

159
00:09:35,200 --> 00:09:39,439
Speaker 4: some of which may have exceeded his constitutional authority, not

160
00:09:40,240 --> 00:09:42,520
Speaker 4: on the level of what we're seeing here.

161
00:09:43,480 --> 00:09:46,520
Speaker 2: David, do you think that of the Supreme Court cases

162
00:09:46,720 --> 00:09:51,080
Speaker 2: coming up that are going to test presidential authority, is

163
00:09:51,080 --> 00:09:55,120
Speaker 2: the Tariff's case the most significant or is there another

164
00:09:55,160 --> 00:09:57,120
Speaker 2: one that's more significant.

165
00:09:58,360 --> 00:10:03,680
Speaker 4: The Tariff's case is extremely significant because the Supreme Court

166
00:10:04,160 --> 00:10:10,719
Speaker 4: is filled with self defined textualists, and it's almost impossible

167
00:10:11,360 --> 00:10:15,400
Speaker 4: to find anything like the powers the President is claiming

168
00:10:16,000 --> 00:10:18,760
Speaker 4: in the text of the statute he is citing. So

169
00:10:19,480 --> 00:10:23,240
Speaker 4: the Court is going to have to either abandon any

170
00:10:23,280 --> 00:10:29,840
Speaker 4: pretense of textualism or limit the president's authority very dramatically.

171
00:10:29,920 --> 00:10:30,280
Speaker 3: There.

172
00:10:30,760 --> 00:10:33,839
Speaker 4: The other case that I'm watching very closely is the

173
00:10:33,880 --> 00:10:37,360
Speaker 4: case involving doctor Cook in the Federal Reserve, because the

174
00:10:37,400 --> 00:10:42,000
Speaker 4: Supreme Court basically told President Trump, you can fire anyone

175
00:10:42,080 --> 00:10:45,640
Speaker 4: except a Federal Reserve governor, and he turned around and

176
00:10:45,679 --> 00:10:49,600
Speaker 4: fired a Federal Reserve governor. If the Supreme Court is

177
00:10:49,679 --> 00:10:52,880
Speaker 4: willing to let him do that. Then they are effectively

178
00:10:52,920 --> 00:10:56,400
Speaker 4: allowing themselves to be humiliated by the President, and we

179
00:10:56,480 --> 00:10:58,880
Speaker 4: can't really expect much of them going forward.

180
00:11:00,120 --> 00:11:02,760
Speaker 2: Think of Trump saying he's going to attend the Supreme

181
00:11:02,840 --> 00:11:05,400
Speaker 2: Court oral arguments on the tariffs.

182
00:11:06,240 --> 00:11:09,320
Speaker 4: I think oral arguments are fascinating and you think for

183
00:11:09,360 --> 00:11:13,720
Speaker 4: a good time. I think with most courts, when a

184
00:11:13,880 --> 00:11:18,520
Speaker 4: party seeks to pressure them, the court feels considerable pressure

185
00:11:18,920 --> 00:11:23,160
Speaker 4: to demonstrate its independence. If I were a lawyer at

186
00:11:23,160 --> 00:11:25,800
Speaker 4: the White House or Justice Department, I would beg him

187
00:11:25,800 --> 00:11:26,520
Speaker 4: not to do that.

188
00:11:27,200 --> 00:11:30,840
Speaker 2: We will find out on November fifth whether he attends

189
00:11:30,880 --> 00:11:34,720
Speaker 2: the oral arguments or not. Thanks so much, David. That's

190
00:11:34,760 --> 00:11:38,840
Speaker 2: Professor David Super of Georgetown Law. Coming up next on

191
00:11:38,840 --> 00:11:41,959
Speaker 2: the Bloomberg Law Show, we'll look at the wrongful death

192
00:11:42,040 --> 00:11:46,360
Speaker 2: trial of Los Angeles pitcher Tyler Skaggs. His wife and

193
00:11:46,440 --> 00:11:50,040
Speaker 2: parents are suing the Los Angeles Angels for more than

194
00:11:50,040 --> 00:11:53,800
Speaker 2: one hundred million dollars. I'm June Grosso and you're listening

195
00:11:53,800 --> 00:11:54,479
Speaker 2: to Bloomberg.

196
00:11:54,960 --> 00:11:57,439
Speaker 4: Tyler Skagg's taking them out for the Angels.

197
00:11:57,600 --> 00:12:01,040
Speaker 2: Tyler Skaggs a picture for the Los Angele Angelus Angels

198
00:12:01,480 --> 00:12:04,040
Speaker 2: was just twenty seven years old when he died of

199
00:12:04,040 --> 00:12:06,959
Speaker 2: a drug overdose while on the road with the team.

200
00:12:07,600 --> 00:12:11,920
Speaker 2: Three years later, Eric Kay, the former Angels communications director,

201
00:12:12,440 --> 00:12:16,679
Speaker 2: was convicted of supplying Skags with a counterfeit oxy codone

202
00:12:16,679 --> 00:12:20,559
Speaker 2: pill laced with fentanol. He was sentenced to twenty two

203
00:12:20,640 --> 00:12:24,439
Speaker 2: years in prison. Now, Skag's wife and his parents are

204
00:12:24,520 --> 00:12:28,520
Speaker 2: suing the Angels, claiming the team knew or should have known,

205
00:12:28,559 --> 00:12:32,200
Speaker 2: that Kay was supplying drugs to players. They're asking for

206
00:12:32,360 --> 00:12:36,559
Speaker 2: eighteen million dollars for Skag's lost earnings, as well as

207
00:12:36,640 --> 00:12:41,559
Speaker 2: compensation for the family's suffering and punitive damages. Here are

208
00:12:41,640 --> 00:12:44,640
Speaker 2: Skag's wife and mother after Kay's conviction.

209
00:12:45,600 --> 00:12:48,280
Speaker 1: I miss Tyler so much. He was he was my

210
00:12:48,320 --> 00:12:52,440
Speaker 1: only son, and you know, I'm not going to be

211
00:12:52,520 --> 00:12:54,280
Speaker 1: a grandma. I'm not going to be able to hold

212
00:12:54,280 --> 00:12:56,960
Speaker 1: a grandchild, and those things are painful. I think about

213
00:12:56,960 --> 00:12:57,640
Speaker 1: that all the time.

214
00:12:58,960 --> 00:13:04,400
Speaker 2: I wonder sometimes ever be as happy as I was.

215
00:13:04,960 --> 00:13:08,680
Speaker 2: The Angels say that team officials didn't know Skaggs was

216
00:13:08,760 --> 00:13:12,520
Speaker 2: taking drugs, and that any drug activity involving him and

217
00:13:12,720 --> 00:13:16,720
Speaker 2: Kay happened on their own time. My guest is healthcare

218
00:13:16,760 --> 00:13:21,080
Speaker 2: attorney Harry Nelson, a partner at leech Tishman Nelson Hardiman.

219
00:13:21,520 --> 00:13:25,360
Speaker 2: He's the author of the book The United States of Opioids.

220
00:13:26,160 --> 00:13:30,360
Speaker 2: Harry Skaggs died in twenty nineteen, and the civil trial

221
00:13:30,480 --> 00:13:34,640
Speaker 2: has just started. Tell us about the family's claims and

222
00:13:35,280 --> 00:13:37,720
Speaker 2: the Los Angeles Angels defense.

223
00:13:38,320 --> 00:13:41,600
Speaker 5: So, Tyler Skaggs died in twenty nineteen in the hotel

224
00:13:41,679 --> 00:13:45,840
Speaker 5: room on this baseball trip with Los Angeles Angels, and

225
00:13:45,960 --> 00:13:48,640
Speaker 5: his family, both his parents and his widow brought us

226
00:13:48,679 --> 00:13:52,480
Speaker 5: civil trials arguing that the Angels had a duty to

227
00:13:52,600 --> 00:13:56,480
Speaker 5: protect Tyler and that they breached that duty by allowing

228
00:13:56,679 --> 00:13:59,680
Speaker 5: this communications director or former communications director from the team

229
00:14:00,080 --> 00:14:04,120
Speaker 5: give the players access to drugs and essentially to fetch

230
00:14:04,200 --> 00:14:06,880
Speaker 5: them for players, and that the team should be held

231
00:14:06,960 --> 00:14:11,000
Speaker 5: liable for the death and for a significant amount of

232
00:14:11,040 --> 00:14:14,440
Speaker 5: lost earnings up to potentially at least two hundred million,

233
00:14:14,520 --> 00:14:16,880
Speaker 5: I think is an argument. And then the question is

234
00:14:16,920 --> 00:14:20,320
Speaker 5: really what the duty of the team, the baseball team,

235
00:14:20,360 --> 00:14:23,480
Speaker 5: it's agents and supervisors had to protect him from the

236
00:14:23,600 --> 00:14:27,280
Speaker 5: harm of drug use and access to a supplier of drugs.

237
00:14:27,560 --> 00:14:30,040
Speaker 2: Is the judge going to tell the jury what the

238
00:14:30,120 --> 00:14:32,560
Speaker 2: duty is. Who's going to decide what the duty is.

239
00:14:33,360 --> 00:14:36,040
Speaker 5: Yeah, so the question of legal duty is a question

240
00:14:36,080 --> 00:14:37,720
Speaker 5: of law that a judge is going to have to

241
00:14:37,760 --> 00:14:40,400
Speaker 5: instruct the jury on. That will be part of the

242
00:14:40,440 --> 00:14:43,200
Speaker 5: jury instructions that stuff parties are going to make arguments on.

243
00:14:43,520 --> 00:14:46,160
Speaker 5: And the real question is, we know that teams have

244
00:14:46,240 --> 00:14:50,920
Speaker 5: a duty to protect players from foreseeable harm, and the

245
00:14:51,040 --> 00:14:54,320
Speaker 5: question is really whether the harm in this case of

246
00:14:54,400 --> 00:14:58,000
Speaker 5: drug use of access to suppliers was a foreseeable harm.

247
00:14:58,240 --> 00:15:00,480
Speaker 5: And then, of course the next question being whether the

248
00:15:00,520 --> 00:15:05,760
Speaker 5: team breached that duty by allowing k communications director access

249
00:15:05,800 --> 00:15:08,680
Speaker 5: to the players, by failing to supervise him, by failing

250
00:15:08,720 --> 00:15:11,120
Speaker 5: to intervene as the family allege as they did.

251
00:15:11,560 --> 00:15:14,080
Speaker 2: What's the defense. What are the angels saying?

252
00:15:14,760 --> 00:15:17,600
Speaker 5: The team's defense is that this is not something that

253
00:15:17,640 --> 00:15:21,480
Speaker 5: they knew or could have known about, that Tylers Skaggs

254
00:15:21,560 --> 00:15:25,200
Speaker 5: was a high performing player who appeared to be, you know,

255
00:15:25,360 --> 00:15:28,560
Speaker 5: appropriately acting as part of the team, that there was

256
00:15:28,600 --> 00:15:32,920
Speaker 5: no evidence of at risk behavior of sort of bad

257
00:15:33,000 --> 00:15:37,160
Speaker 5: conduct off the field or anything unsafe, and that they

258
00:15:37,200 --> 00:15:40,080
Speaker 5: behaved reasonably in the way that they acted, and that

259
00:15:40,120 --> 00:15:45,200
Speaker 5: they didn't have that responsibility to manage this problem or

260
00:15:45,240 --> 00:15:48,440
Speaker 5: the person who's really the focus of the allegations here.

261
00:15:48,680 --> 00:15:52,080
Speaker 2: Yeah, it seems like the plaintiff's whole case is based

262
00:15:52,240 --> 00:15:56,680
Speaker 2: on this Eric Kay, who is sitting in prison with

263
00:15:56,720 --> 00:15:58,600
Speaker 2: a twenty two year sentence.

264
00:15:59,280 --> 00:16:02,360
Speaker 5: Yeah, it really does. That's really the core argument, because

265
00:16:02,800 --> 00:16:06,080
Speaker 5: you know, it's very difficult to see how you know,

266
00:16:06,160 --> 00:16:10,080
Speaker 5: a sports team or any organization can manage behaviors that's

267
00:16:10,120 --> 00:16:12,560
Speaker 5: out of sight where there aren't warning signs, and even

268
00:16:12,600 --> 00:16:15,160
Speaker 5: you know, even the plane iff witnesses. Steve Trout, the

269
00:16:15,320 --> 00:16:18,560
Speaker 5: legendary player who testified this past week, said that there

270
00:16:18,600 --> 00:16:21,280
Speaker 5: was nothing that he saw in Tyler Skaggs that was

271
00:16:21,360 --> 00:16:23,760
Speaker 5: any kind of bad behavior or a warning sign, And

272
00:16:23,800 --> 00:16:26,440
Speaker 5: everything seems to be hanging on Eric k and the

273
00:16:26,480 --> 00:16:28,560
Speaker 5: warning signs that there was something going on, and that,

274
00:16:28,840 --> 00:16:31,600
Speaker 5: by the way, is very interesting. Steve Trout testified that

275
00:16:31,640 --> 00:16:35,440
Speaker 5: there were a lot of unusual behaviors in Kay. It

276
00:16:35,560 --> 00:16:38,480
Speaker 5: was sort of almost like a gesture in the most

277
00:16:38,480 --> 00:16:41,960
Speaker 5: benign sense, but obviously was doing some really terrible things

278
00:16:41,960 --> 00:16:44,360
Speaker 5: in terms of functioning as a drug dealer or Tyler

279
00:16:44,440 --> 00:16:45,440
Speaker 5: and other players.

280
00:16:45,680 --> 00:16:49,480
Speaker 2: During K's criminal trial, Skagg's wife said that she didn't

281
00:16:49,520 --> 00:16:51,680
Speaker 2: know about his drug use, so if she doesn't know

282
00:16:51,720 --> 00:16:54,520
Speaker 2: about his drug use, then how is the team supposed

283
00:16:54,560 --> 00:16:54,760
Speaker 2: to know?

284
00:16:55,480 --> 00:16:58,120
Speaker 5: It's a fair question, right, Clearly, Tyler Scaggs was able

285
00:16:58,160 --> 00:17:00,720
Speaker 5: to keep his drug use from from people very close

286
00:17:00,760 --> 00:17:03,400
Speaker 5: to him and even his wife, So it is tricky

287
00:17:03,680 --> 00:17:05,840
Speaker 5: to know. And at the same time, you know, we

288
00:17:05,920 --> 00:17:10,360
Speaker 5: do in our society hold employers responsible for the behavior

289
00:17:10,440 --> 00:17:13,920
Speaker 5: of their employees. That's known, and so eric K, there

290
00:17:13,960 --> 00:17:16,760
Speaker 5: clearly were concerns there was something going on with him

291
00:17:16,800 --> 00:17:20,440
Speaker 5: that he himself was behaving in sort of disturbing ways.

292
00:17:20,640 --> 00:17:22,560
Speaker 5: So it's a tough call. I mean, I think it's

293
00:17:22,600 --> 00:17:24,879
Speaker 5: fair to say that the Angels, you know, could have

294
00:17:25,040 --> 00:17:28,960
Speaker 5: easily behaved reasonably and missed anything going on with Tyler's Staggs.

295
00:17:29,040 --> 00:17:33,240
Speaker 5: But clearly there was something unusual about eric K and

296
00:17:33,400 --> 00:17:34,040
Speaker 5: his behavior.

297
00:17:34,760 --> 00:17:38,560
Speaker 2: Now where does it fit in that there was evidence

298
00:17:38,640 --> 00:17:42,880
Speaker 2: that Skaggs used drugs when he was with the Diamondbacks,

299
00:17:43,480 --> 00:17:48,399
Speaker 2: and that again during Cay's criminal trial, his mother testified

300
00:17:48,520 --> 00:17:51,520
Speaker 2: that her son had an issue with oxy codone going

301
00:17:51,600 --> 00:17:57,440
Speaker 2: back to twenty thirteen. He wasn't prescribed opioids after undergoing

302
00:17:57,560 --> 00:18:02,800
Speaker 2: Tommy John's surgery in August twenty four because of that.

303
00:18:02,040 --> 00:18:05,080
Speaker 5: That's also, yeah, another dimension the case, sort of player safety,

304
00:18:05,119 --> 00:18:07,399
Speaker 5: in terms of how much the team should have known.

305
00:18:07,440 --> 00:18:09,520
Speaker 5: The Angels are arguing, of course this Gags had this

306
00:18:09,680 --> 00:18:13,120
Speaker 5: prior drug problems in the past, that he was drinking heavily,

307
00:18:13,200 --> 00:18:15,600
Speaker 5: that he was getting killed from other places. But the

308
00:18:15,680 --> 00:18:18,320
Speaker 5: point is actually, I think a strong one that the

309
00:18:18,359 --> 00:18:20,720
Speaker 5: family is making here, which is that there was a

310
00:18:20,760 --> 00:18:23,679
Speaker 5: warning sign. You know, the team should have known because

311
00:18:23,840 --> 00:18:27,760
Speaker 5: this player, you know, players in general, are at risk

312
00:18:27,880 --> 00:18:31,760
Speaker 5: of so much physical and emotional mental strain in the

313
00:18:31,800 --> 00:18:34,560
Speaker 5: work that they're doing, that they're inherently at risk for

314
00:18:34,800 --> 00:18:38,480
Speaker 5: pains and for addiction, and that the team had a

315
00:18:38,600 --> 00:18:41,639
Speaker 5: duty to be more proactive in how it's monitored access

316
00:18:41,680 --> 00:18:43,680
Speaker 5: to the drugs themselves. So I think it's a really

317
00:18:43,680 --> 00:18:47,080
Speaker 5: interesting issue and it could have a profound impact on

318
00:18:47,160 --> 00:18:52,320
Speaker 5: how sports teams generally are monitoring risks around control substances,

319
00:18:52,560 --> 00:18:56,199
Speaker 5: not only how they screen employees and non players, but

320
00:18:56,280 --> 00:18:59,800
Speaker 5: also how they think about, you know, the risks associated

321
00:18:59,840 --> 00:19:02,800
Speaker 5: with game and with you know, its impact on players.

322
00:19:03,200 --> 00:19:08,480
Speaker 2: How much responsibility does Skags have for his own behavior,

323
00:19:08,760 --> 00:19:11,480
Speaker 2: you know, knowing that he had these drug problems, etc.

324
00:19:12,280 --> 00:19:14,439
Speaker 2: Doesn't he have some responsibility as well.

325
00:19:15,280 --> 00:19:17,960
Speaker 5: Look, I think that is kind of the tragedy of

326
00:19:18,359 --> 00:19:23,439
Speaker 5: you know, the opioid crisis writ large. Obviously, Skags was

327
00:19:24,160 --> 00:19:29,400
Speaker 5: taking enormous personal risk and really engaging in self destructive behavior.

328
00:19:29,960 --> 00:19:32,640
Speaker 5: And you know, that's the case essentially in a way,

329
00:19:32,680 --> 00:19:36,479
Speaker 5: that's that's every case of addiction. But we noticed it

330
00:19:36,560 --> 00:19:40,600
Speaker 5: just heres, particularly because this was such a supreme talent

331
00:19:40,840 --> 00:19:43,679
Speaker 5: so young, you know, lost as a result of it.

332
00:19:43,720 --> 00:19:46,200
Speaker 5: But I do think this really is a deep question

333
00:19:46,240 --> 00:19:48,879
Speaker 5: within the opiated crisis. The bottom line is, yes, the

334
00:19:48,920 --> 00:19:52,240
Speaker 5: people who are engaging in drug use have responsibility for

335
00:19:52,400 --> 00:19:55,159
Speaker 5: their conduct. But that's what we are, right and the

336
00:19:55,200 --> 00:19:56,720
Speaker 5: question is what do we do and where do we

337
00:19:56,880 --> 00:20:01,560
Speaker 5: lay down the duty of opposing safety be externally and

338
00:20:01,600 --> 00:20:07,040
Speaker 5: accountability externally because people like Tyler Skaggs are taking risks

339
00:20:07,080 --> 00:20:08,720
Speaker 5: that they simply should not be.

340
00:20:09,119 --> 00:20:12,840
Speaker 2: So the cause of death and the angel's attorney brought

341
00:20:12,880 --> 00:20:16,919
Speaker 2: this out. The autopsy showed levels of xy codone, fentanyl,

342
00:20:17,000 --> 00:20:21,320
Speaker 2: and alcohol, and he said that Skags died due to

343
00:20:21,320 --> 00:20:26,840
Speaker 2: his reckless decision to mix large amounts of alcohol with narcotics.

344
00:20:27,320 --> 00:20:30,159
Speaker 5: So clearly, you know, this is the classic example you

345
00:20:30,240 --> 00:20:33,200
Speaker 5: learn in the first year of law school about contributing factors. Right,

346
00:20:33,280 --> 00:20:37,520
Speaker 5: alcohol was clearly a contributing factor, although there's no evidence

347
00:20:37,520 --> 00:20:40,560
Speaker 5: that had Tyler Skaggs simply been drinking that night that

348
00:20:40,760 --> 00:20:42,359
Speaker 5: he would have died, So it was therefore not the

349
00:20:42,359 --> 00:20:44,919
Speaker 5: soul cause. So there has to be some breakdown. He

350
00:20:45,040 --> 00:20:47,840
Speaker 5: was hit some level of fentanyl, some level of oxycodon,

351
00:20:47,920 --> 00:20:52,159
Speaker 5: some level of alcohol that combined to cause him badly

352
00:20:52,640 --> 00:20:55,480
Speaker 5: to choke on his own vomit effectively under the three substances.

353
00:20:55,840 --> 00:20:58,879
Speaker 5: So you know, the role of alcohol as a contributing

354
00:20:58,920 --> 00:21:03,280
Speaker 5: factor some that definitely intoxicated him and made things worse

355
00:21:03,760 --> 00:21:05,760
Speaker 5: is something that the jury will and the judge will

356
00:21:05,760 --> 00:21:07,800
Speaker 5: have to take into acount what that role was. He

357
00:21:07,880 --> 00:21:11,040
Speaker 5: clearly made a choice to drink significantly that night, which

358
00:21:11,440 --> 00:21:13,800
Speaker 5: was part of the chain of causation here. But it's

359
00:21:13,800 --> 00:21:17,520
Speaker 5: pretty clear that had he not had the bentanyl lace

360
00:21:17,720 --> 00:21:21,040
Speaker 5: pills that Airk supplied, we wouldn't be where we are

361
00:21:21,240 --> 00:21:22,480
Speaker 5: and he wouldn't have died that night.

362
00:21:23,200 --> 00:21:28,040
Speaker 2: So Eric Kay was convicted of supplying Skags with a

363
00:21:28,119 --> 00:21:32,720
Speaker 2: counterfeit oxycodone pill laced with phent and al. Since it

364
00:21:32,800 --> 00:21:35,600
Speaker 2: was counterfeit, does that mean that there were other harmful

365
00:21:35,800 --> 00:21:38,440
Speaker 2: ingredients besides those in the pills.

366
00:21:39,080 --> 00:21:42,679
Speaker 5: Now, the pills here were fentanyl lace, they were counterfeited pills.

367
00:21:43,080 --> 00:21:45,840
Speaker 5: So essentially, you know, like so many people have died

368
00:21:45,880 --> 00:21:48,920
Speaker 5: in the in this crisis, it's clear that you know,

369
00:21:49,160 --> 00:21:54,920
Speaker 5: er k unwittingly gave counterfeit pills that were significantly fentanyl.

370
00:21:55,200 --> 00:21:58,200
Speaker 5: It appears that there was some mix of fentyl ox coota,

371
00:21:58,560 --> 00:22:00,720
Speaker 5: and it's not clear to me whether those were like

372
00:22:00,800 --> 00:22:04,840
Speaker 5: different pills. It's clear that Eric Kaye was like many people,

373
00:22:05,200 --> 00:22:08,080
Speaker 5: buying things that he thought were oxy codone and in

374
00:22:08,160 --> 00:22:11,919
Speaker 5: fact were you know, street based toxic sentinel that he

375
00:22:11,960 --> 00:22:13,320
Speaker 5: was delivering to tylish guys.

376
00:22:13,920 --> 00:22:17,600
Speaker 2: When deciding on the damages related to Skaggs lost earnings,

377
00:22:17,800 --> 00:22:22,720
Speaker 2: he was in the starting lineup, but apparently struggling with injuries.

378
00:22:23,200 --> 00:22:27,120
Speaker 2: So how will each side approach this and how will

379
00:22:27,119 --> 00:22:31,280
Speaker 2: the jury make a final determination, because with the injuries

380
00:22:31,359 --> 00:22:34,560
Speaker 2: and the drug use, it might be hard to tell

381
00:22:34,600 --> 00:22:36,680
Speaker 2: how successful he would have been.

382
00:22:37,359 --> 00:22:39,600
Speaker 5: The damages in these cases in case like this are

383
00:22:39,640 --> 00:22:42,680
Speaker 5: a combination of pain and suffering and lost earnings. And

384
00:22:42,960 --> 00:22:46,760
Speaker 5: as you're eluding, lost earnings is the big variable, you know,

385
00:22:46,760 --> 00:22:49,879
Speaker 5: potentially and then of course punitive damages. So you know,

386
00:22:49,960 --> 00:22:52,600
Speaker 5: my view of these cases is that even if the

387
00:22:52,680 --> 00:22:56,000
Speaker 5: jury holds the Angel responsible, which if I had to

388
00:22:56,880 --> 00:22:58,600
Speaker 5: make a bet here I would, I think is the

389
00:22:58,600 --> 00:23:00,480
Speaker 5: way this case will go, the jury will tell us

390
00:23:00,520 --> 00:23:04,000
Speaker 5: a lot by the amount of damages that they hold

391
00:23:04,000 --> 00:23:06,480
Speaker 5: the team responsible for, you know, the plain of star

392
00:23:06,600 --> 00:23:09,520
Speaker 5: hoping that the jury may you know, impose as much

393
00:23:09,520 --> 00:23:11,639
Speaker 5: as you know, a billion or half a million dollars

394
00:23:11,680 --> 00:23:15,320
Speaker 5: of damages when you had impunitives here. The highly specular part,

395
00:23:15,440 --> 00:23:18,560
Speaker 5: of course, is how far the lost earnings would go.

396
00:23:19,320 --> 00:23:22,040
Speaker 5: And it's anyone's guess how this jury is going to go.

397
00:23:22,240 --> 00:23:24,800
Speaker 5: I always look at these damage awards and think that

398
00:23:24,840 --> 00:23:29,159
Speaker 5: there's a largely emotional component in terms of how the jurors,

399
00:23:29,560 --> 00:23:32,240
Speaker 5: you know, how much anger and how strong of a

400
00:23:32,320 --> 00:23:35,720
Speaker 5: message they're trying to send to the team about this case.

401
00:23:36,359 --> 00:23:39,879
Speaker 2: Coming up next, I'll continue this conversation with healthcare attorney

402
00:23:39,920 --> 00:23:43,480
Speaker 2: Harry Nelson. This seems like a case that could have

403
00:23:43,600 --> 00:23:48,119
Speaker 2: settled before trial. I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg.

404
00:23:51,600 --> 00:23:55,719
Speaker 2: The wrongful death trial of Los Angeles Angels Pitcher Tyler

405
00:23:55,800 --> 00:23:59,280
Speaker 2: Skaggs comes more than six years after, he was found

406
00:23:59,280 --> 00:24:02,520
Speaker 2: dead in a bourbon Dallas hotel room where he was

407
00:24:02,560 --> 00:24:05,400
Speaker 2: staying as the Angels were supposed to open a four

408
00:24:05,480 --> 00:24:09,960
Speaker 2: game series against the Texas Rangers. A coroner's report said

409
00:24:09,960 --> 00:24:12,840
Speaker 2: that Skaggs choked to death on his vomit, and a

410
00:24:12,880 --> 00:24:17,159
Speaker 2: toxic mix of alcohol, fentanyl, and oxycodone was found in

411
00:24:17,200 --> 00:24:20,640
Speaker 2: his system. Eric Kaye was convicted in twenty twenty two

412
00:24:20,760 --> 00:24:25,919
Speaker 2: of providing Skags with a counterfeit oxycodone pill laced with fentanyl.

413
00:24:26,280 --> 00:24:29,639
Speaker 2: I've been talking to healthcare attorney Harry Nelson of Leech

414
00:24:29,720 --> 00:24:34,600
Speaker 2: Tishman Nelson Hardiman. Harry, you think that the plaintiffs will

415
00:24:34,600 --> 00:24:38,880
Speaker 2: win here, so Skagg's wife and his parents. Why did

416
00:24:38,920 --> 00:24:40,200
Speaker 2: you come to that conclusion.

417
00:24:41,040 --> 00:24:44,080
Speaker 5: I just think Tyler's widow, I think his family are

418
00:24:44,760 --> 00:24:49,000
Speaker 5: you deeply sympathetic? And I think this is a case.

419
00:24:49,280 --> 00:24:53,159
Speaker 5: As much as this problem of opioid overdose death is

420
00:24:53,200 --> 00:24:58,040
Speaker 5: a just profound national crisis, Tyler Skaggs has become uniquely

421
00:24:58,680 --> 00:25:02,480
Speaker 5: a symbol. And it does appear that the team you know,

422
00:25:02,760 --> 00:25:06,040
Speaker 5: was a part of the circumstances that led to it,

423
00:25:06,160 --> 00:25:09,959
Speaker 5: in terms of allowing someone like Eric kay into an

424
00:25:09,960 --> 00:25:12,400
Speaker 5: official team position. It wasn't just like he was part

425
00:25:12,440 --> 00:25:15,239
Speaker 5: of Tyler Skagg's entourage. And I think in general, when

426
00:25:15,280 --> 00:25:18,040
Speaker 5: you read the coverage, I do think that is a

427
00:25:18,160 --> 00:25:21,520
Speaker 5: unique problem that the angel stays here and that makes

428
00:25:21,520 --> 00:25:22,680
Speaker 5: this an uphill double for them.

429
00:25:23,359 --> 00:25:25,520
Speaker 2: I understand that you know the wife's suing. Is it

430
00:25:25,600 --> 00:25:27,399
Speaker 2: unusual to have the parents suing.

431
00:25:28,000 --> 00:25:30,480
Speaker 5: No, A lot of these cases are initiated by parents.

432
00:25:30,520 --> 00:25:32,640
Speaker 5: You know. Unfortunately, in a crisis is affecting so many

433
00:25:32,720 --> 00:25:36,240
Speaker 5: young people, you have so many people who are unmarried

434
00:25:36,320 --> 00:25:39,080
Speaker 5: or who never had children, and so it's very common

435
00:25:39,119 --> 00:25:41,919
Speaker 5: to see the family doing I think the Tyler Skag's

436
00:25:41,920 --> 00:25:45,960
Speaker 5: family have been particularly articulate about this tragedy and that

437
00:25:46,000 --> 00:25:48,879
Speaker 5: have made it into a symbol. But unfortunately, I know

438
00:25:48,960 --> 00:25:52,119
Speaker 5: too many parents who are in the same position and

439
00:25:52,359 --> 00:25:55,920
Speaker 5: just looking somewhere for relief. And very few times can

440
00:25:55,960 --> 00:25:59,440
Speaker 5: you point to an organization like a professional baseball team

441
00:25:59,440 --> 00:26:02,680
Speaker 5: and say they're responsible. So many of these opioid overdose

442
00:26:02,720 --> 00:26:06,520
Speaker 5: deaths there's an anonymous drug dealer and nobody to actually

443
00:26:06,600 --> 00:26:10,200
Speaker 5: hold financially responsible. So that's another piece of this case.

444
00:26:10,200 --> 00:26:11,040
Speaker 5: It's very unusual.

445
00:26:11,760 --> 00:26:13,720
Speaker 2: Yeah, I was going to ask you whether you've seen

446
00:26:13,760 --> 00:26:18,879
Speaker 2: any other cases involving opioid deaths where the employer was responsible.

447
00:26:18,880 --> 00:26:21,359
Speaker 2: I guess baseball's kind of a different scenario.

448
00:26:21,800 --> 00:26:25,679
Speaker 5: Professional sports are certainly, you know, unusual. We've seen it

449
00:26:25,720 --> 00:26:29,040
Speaker 5: also in healthcare. Actually, the thing about professional sports and

450
00:26:29,480 --> 00:26:32,480
Speaker 5: frankly sports at all, you know, at college level as well,

451
00:26:32,600 --> 00:26:37,359
Speaker 5: is that you have these medical operations around the team

452
00:26:37,480 --> 00:26:40,080
Speaker 5: that lead to a much higher level of access. We

453
00:26:40,160 --> 00:26:43,000
Speaker 5: of course see the same thing with celebrities who are

454
00:26:43,000 --> 00:26:46,040
Speaker 5: able to have you know, doctors at the ready, ready

455
00:26:46,040 --> 00:26:48,399
Speaker 5: to get them whatever they need, and we've seen so

456
00:26:48,480 --> 00:26:51,199
Speaker 5: many of those crises. Occasionally, we do see in the

457
00:26:51,200 --> 00:26:54,959
Speaker 5: healthcare system the fact that people's proximity allows them if

458
00:26:55,000 --> 00:26:58,280
Speaker 5: there isn't care taken around controlled substance access there too,

459
00:26:58,600 --> 00:27:00,920
Speaker 5: But that is a very unusual faster than this case,

460
00:27:00,920 --> 00:27:03,280
Speaker 5: and I think one of the reasons why it's forcing

461
00:27:03,359 --> 00:27:06,080
Speaker 5: us to confront these questions of duty in ways that

462
00:27:06,080 --> 00:27:08,080
Speaker 5: I think we'll ripple out and affect a lot more

463
00:27:08,080 --> 00:27:11,760
Speaker 5: of how people think about the responsibility to be watching

464
00:27:11,840 --> 00:27:14,600
Speaker 5: out and protecting people from this risk.

465
00:27:15,520 --> 00:27:17,920
Speaker 2: This does seem like a case that should have settled

466
00:27:17,920 --> 00:27:18,840
Speaker 2: before trial.

467
00:27:19,800 --> 00:27:22,080
Speaker 5: Yeah, you know, I can't speak to the negotiations here.

468
00:27:22,440 --> 00:27:25,959
Speaker 5: But I don't think that the team views it as

469
00:27:25,960 --> 00:27:28,040
Speaker 5: a success that this case went to trial. I do

470
00:27:28,160 --> 00:27:31,000
Speaker 5: know that there were offers, but the family I don't

471
00:27:31,000 --> 00:27:33,439
Speaker 5: know to what extent they decided to go to trials

472
00:27:33,520 --> 00:27:37,520
Speaker 5: simply to make sure that this case received attention and

473
00:27:37,560 --> 00:27:39,679
Speaker 5: to deal with the problem on a bigger level. But

474
00:27:39,760 --> 00:27:43,439
Speaker 5: clearly the exposure of the team again which people are

475
00:27:43,440 --> 00:27:47,080
Speaker 5: saying if the punitive damage is numbers were validated, could

476
00:27:47,119 --> 00:27:49,840
Speaker 5: go up to a billion or more dollars, is really

477
00:27:50,000 --> 00:27:52,720
Speaker 5: really substantial. So the fact that this case did not

478
00:27:52,760 --> 00:27:55,640
Speaker 5: settle earlier is not a good thing for the team.

479
00:27:56,000 --> 00:27:59,480
Speaker 2: Up to a billion. I know that some jury verdicts

480
00:27:59,520 --> 00:28:02,600
Speaker 2: have been just through the roof lately, but how do

481
00:28:02,680 --> 00:28:05,399
Speaker 2: they reach a billion dollars here from the one hundred

482
00:28:05,440 --> 00:28:07,920
Speaker 2: and eighteen million in lost earnings.

483
00:28:08,240 --> 00:28:10,680
Speaker 5: No, that's with the punitive damage numbers that the planet's

484
00:28:10,720 --> 00:28:14,119
Speaker 5: lawyers have asked for. But I will not be surprised

485
00:28:14,160 --> 00:28:17,040
Speaker 5: to see this case have a nine figure settlement, meaning

486
00:28:17,119 --> 00:28:19,399
Speaker 5: hundreds of millions of dollars. So I think you know

487
00:28:19,480 --> 00:28:21,200
Speaker 5: the Angels are at risk. You can argue all you

488
00:28:21,240 --> 00:28:24,879
Speaker 5: want that Tyler Keag never would have you know rebounded

489
00:28:24,920 --> 00:28:27,359
Speaker 5: and been a great player. But I think when people

490
00:28:27,400 --> 00:28:30,080
Speaker 5: are looking at a young man with so much potential,

491
00:28:30,600 --> 00:28:32,480
Speaker 5: I think the natural tendency is going to be to

492
00:28:33,320 --> 00:28:37,120
Speaker 5: assume that the last earnings are real and to give

493
00:28:37,320 --> 00:28:39,360
Speaker 5: a substantial reward here, Harry.

494
00:28:39,120 --> 00:28:42,240
Speaker 2: Don't you think that jury's have been sort of giving

495
00:28:42,280 --> 00:28:48,040
Speaker 2: out judgments that reflect jackpot lottery winnings. Even in cases

496
00:28:48,120 --> 00:28:52,480
Speaker 2: involving a single plaintiff. Jury verdicts are just exploding.

497
00:28:52,800 --> 00:28:54,920
Speaker 5: No, quite, Look, we see it in our cases that

498
00:28:54,960 --> 00:28:57,640
Speaker 5: we're handling. There's no question about this whole issue of

499
00:28:57,720 --> 00:29:01,440
Speaker 5: jury insulation and this trend of much higher award in

500
00:29:01,520 --> 00:29:05,080
Speaker 5: wrongful death cases and personal injury cases and corporate liability cases.

501
00:29:05,480 --> 00:29:07,560
Speaker 5: And I think it's a real problem because you know,

502
00:29:07,600 --> 00:29:10,400
Speaker 5: often organizations will think they have enough insurance to cover things,

503
00:29:10,400 --> 00:29:14,000
Speaker 5: and then the forces I think yours are just less

504
00:29:14,320 --> 00:29:17,480
Speaker 5: deferential to large organizations. We're living in a time when

505
00:29:17,520 --> 00:29:21,160
Speaker 5: people are, you know, more likely to distrust institutions, and

506
00:29:21,280 --> 00:29:23,960
Speaker 5: people are wanting to send messages, and nothing sends a

507
00:29:24,000 --> 00:29:27,560
Speaker 5: message in this context like a very large verdict. So

508
00:29:27,920 --> 00:29:31,400
Speaker 5: it's definitely a problematic trend. And you know, I'm finding

509
00:29:31,440 --> 00:29:35,680
Speaker 5: clients in much more mundane cases are encountering it just

510
00:29:35,720 --> 00:29:38,720
Speaker 5: because it's you know, it's like you think, you know

511
00:29:38,800 --> 00:29:42,080
Speaker 5: that standard whatever insurance policy that you have is going

512
00:29:42,120 --> 00:29:44,600
Speaker 5: to be enough. But if you get an aggressive planeflawyer

513
00:29:44,680 --> 00:29:47,720
Speaker 5: who is able to tell a story very effectively and

514
00:29:47,760 --> 00:29:50,760
Speaker 5: really emotionally moved yours, you could be looking at a

515
00:29:50,760 --> 00:29:51,520
Speaker 5: lot more exposure.

516
00:29:51,960 --> 00:29:56,520
Speaker 2: Well, the Supreme Court has set guidance that punitive damages

517
00:29:56,720 --> 00:30:01,080
Speaker 2: shouldn't exceed a nine to one ratio to compare damages,

518
00:30:01,600 --> 00:30:05,840
Speaker 2: so we shall see what happens here. Thanks for joining me, Harry.

519
00:30:06,160 --> 00:30:10,160
Speaker 2: That's Harry Nelson of Leech Tishman Nelson Hardiman. He's the

520
00:30:10,200 --> 00:30:14,240
Speaker 2: author of the United States of Opioids. And that's it

521
00:30:14,320 --> 00:30:16,880
Speaker 2: for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you

522
00:30:16,920 --> 00:30:19,360
Speaker 2: can always get the latest legal news on our Bloomberg

523
00:30:19,480 --> 00:30:23,080
Speaker 2: Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

524
00:30:23,280 --> 00:30:28,320
Speaker 2: and at www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law,

525
00:30:28,720 --> 00:30:31,320
Speaker 2: and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every

526
00:30:31,360 --> 00:30:35,280
Speaker 2: weeknight at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso

527
00:30:35,400 --> 00:30:37,000
Speaker 2: and you're listening to Bloomberg