Ripple concussion suit arguments aired in federal court in Austin
Blake Ripple and his mom, Lori, were in U.S. District Court in Austin Friday, Jan. 23, as their lawyer and MFISD’s lawyer made oral arguments in front of a federal judge.
By Emily Hilley-Sierzchula
In a case that could have implications beyond the state of Texas, lawyers for both sides in the Blake Ripple v. Marble Falls Independent School District (MFISD) concussion lawsuit made oral arguments in front of a federal judge Friday, Jan. 23, at the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas in Austin.
Arguments will resume in late February or early March. The judge deciding the outcome of the case said it would take at least another month afterward for him to reach a decision.
“Somebody isn’t going to be happy with my decision, but that’s the way it is,” said Senior U.S. District Judge Daniel Ezra from the bench.
“I don’t have my mind made up in this case,” he said, adding that even though he has a full caseload, he will “take time to carefully review the arguments” of both sides.
Ripple, 22, sued Marble Falls Independent School District in September 2012, claiming he suffered more than 30 concussions or sub-concussions during his time playing football from 2007-2011 for Marble Falls High School.
Ripple alleges Cord Woerner, former athletic director and head football coach, ignored multiple concussions he suffered as a lineman, according to documents on file with the U.S. District Court.
Woerner, who was present in the courtroom, is now an assistant superintendent with the district. Although he was named as a defendant in the original court filings, he is no longer being sued individually.
“The issue of safety in football is paramount nationally,” said Ripple's legal representative, Martin Cirkiel, of the law firm Cirkiel & Associates in Round Rock. “The issue has been addressed at the professional level, at the college level, but as far as I know this is the first case to look at the issue for high school students.”
Ripple’s case is in a federal court, instead of state court, because of alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Cirkiel dropped his 14th Amendment violation claim during his portion of argument after conferring with his clients, which means the case will center on ADA claims.
For more details on this case, see Tuesday's Highlander.
