Illegal Hits and Football Injuries: Legal Rights for Tennessee Athletes
Athletics are tough, particularly football. Injuries are part of the game, and every player knows it when they strap on a helmet. But what happens when an injury doesn’t come from a clean tackle or a normal play—but from an illegal hit? At what point does the roughness of the game cross the line into civil liability?
That’s where sports and tort law meet head-on.
Assumption of Risk: The Starting Point
In most sports injury cases, the first legal barrier is assumption of risk. When you play football, you accept that you may get hurt. A hard tackle, a collision—these are risks built into the game. Courts often say you can’t sue another player for something that falls inside the normal “rules of play.”
But there’s a limit: you don’t assume the risk of someone breaking safety rules on purpose or acting with reckless disregard for another player’s safety.
The Illegal Hit Exception
If a player throws a legal block and you get hurt, that’s typically part of the game. But if the hit is late, helmet-to-helmet, targeting, or otherwise illegal under rules designed to protect players—your consent ends there. Courts routinely hold that when a player disregards safety rules, civil liability is on the table. You sign up for football, not for cheap shots.
Negligence vs. Recklessness: The Legal Standard
Not every bad play makes a lawsuit. The law sets a higher bar for contact sports:
Negligence (ordinary carelessness) usually won’t win by itself.
Recklessness (conscious disregard of a substantial risk) is the key basis for player-on-player claims.
Intentional torts (assault/battery) apply to fights, sucker punches, or hits after the whistle.
The Hackbart Case: Why It Still Matters
One of the most important cases in this area is Hackbart v. Cincinnati Bengals (10th Cir. 1979). The facts could have been pulled straight out of a frustrated Saturday scrimmage. Denver Broncos defensive back Dale Hackbart was kneeling after a play when Bengals running back Charles “Booby” Clark, out of anger, struck him in the back of the head with his forearm. No penalty was called, but Hackbart’s career ended with a serious neck injury.
At first, the trial court dismissed his case, reasoning that football was simply “too violent” for tort law to apply. In other words, if you played football, you accepted even the risk of illegal hits.
But on appeal, the Tenth Circuit reversed. The court made three points that continue to shape sports injury cases today:
Rules Matter. Players assume the risk of lawful contact, not blows that violate the safety rules of the game.
Recklessness Counts. Even without proof of intent to injure, reckless misconduct—like striking a player after the whistle—is actionable.
Sports Aren’t Lawless. Leagues don’t get to exempt themselves from civil law. The courtroom remains open when conduct steps outside accepted play.
The Hackbart ruling doesn’t turn every late hit into a lawsuit, but it does draw a clear line: “part of the game” versus “over the line.” That line is where tort law comes in.
Beyond the Player: Who Else May Be Liable?
Liability can extend beyond the tackler:
Teams & Coaches – negligent training/supervision; forcing injured players to play.
Equipment Manufacturers – defective helmets or pads.
Facility Owners – unsafe fields/premises.
Medical Staff – negligent clearance or follow-up care.
Schools and Districts - See More Below
Serious cases often name multiple defendants to ensure full compensation.
New: What Spearman v. Shelby County Schools Means for School District Liability (Tennessee)
Spearman v. Shelby Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 637 S.W.3d 719 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2021) involved a middle-school shot-put demonstration where a coach/assistant threw the implement toward a group of students; a 12-year-old was struck, suffered a depressed skull fracture, surgery, and lasting symptoms. Key holdings with district-level implications:
GTLA Immunity Turns on the Employee’s Fault Level
Under the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA), immunity is removed for ordinary negligence by employees acting within scope—but not for intentional torts, recklessness, or gross negligence. The Court affirmed liability because the employee’s conduct was ordinary negligence (not intentional/reckless).
Translation for districts: careless supervision/instruction can create exposure; paradoxically, arguing your staff was more culpable (reckless) may restore immunity—but that defense rarely fits the facts and is a risky bet in front of a judge.Scope of Employment & Vicarious Liability
The coach was acting within scope; the Board was vicariously liable for his negligence. Districts should expect that on-field or tryout activities by staff will be treated as “scope of employment.”Comparative Fault & Minors (“Rule of Sevens”)
For ages 7–14, there’s a presumption the child lacks capacity for negligence. The district failed to rebut it because the student was unfamiliar with shot put and had not been given clear safety instruction.
Practice point: do not count on shifting fault to a 12-year-old in a specialized sport without proof of robust instruction and clear, enforced safety protocols.Proof & Evidence Lessons
Medical bills: if plaintiffs comply with Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-5-113(b), bills are presumed reasonable; be prepared with timely, admissible rebuttal—or that number will likely come in.
Experts & depositions: practicing physicians are trial-subpoena exempt; their depositions can be read at trial. Defense should plan discovery and cross-examination with that reality in mind.
Damages & Caps
The Court affirmed $200,000 in compensatory damages (medical + non-economic) within GTLA caps. Expect real exposure for serious injuries even when a student returns to sports.
District Risk-Management Takeaways
Written sport-specific safety protocols (including demonstrations): where staff stands, where students stand, retrieval procedures, and never throwing toward a group.
Training & certification for coaches (including assistants) before supervising higher-risk events (e.g., shot put, tackling drills, sleds). Document completion.
Pre-participation safety talks with student sign-offs; repeat when activities change.
Spacing/control on fields: clearly marked safety zones, spotters, and a “stop” command that all students recognize.
Supervision ratios and lines of sight that ensure no student is within the “danger cone.”
Incident documentation: video retention, witness names, immediate parent notice, and post-incident corrective actions.
Contractor alignment: third-party coaches or volunteers must follow district protocols; require proof of training and insurance.
Claims triage: preserve evidence, pull policies, and notify your carrier early.
Damages: What Can Be Recovered?
If successful, an injured athlete can recover:
Economic damages – medical bills, lost wages, lost earning potential.
Non-economic damages – pain, suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life.
Punitive damages – only for egregious misconduct (generally not against districts under the GTLA).
GTLA caps apply to public entities.
How Tennessee Law Applies (Quick Guide)
Recklessness is the key for player-on-player liability; ordinary negligence often isn’t enough in contact-sport claims between athletes.
Comparative fault: Tennessee is modified 50%—but minors 7–14 get a presumption of no capacity (hard to pin blame on them without proof of training/warnings).
Claims against schools (GTLA): immunity removed for ordinary negligence; not removed for intentional/reckless/gross conduct. Damage caps apply.
Student-athletes: no workers’ comp; civil claims and medical payments policies drive recovery.
Checklist: If Your Child Is Injured by an Illegal Hit in Tennessee
Medical first; keep all records and imaging.
Save video (game film, parent clips), names of witnesses, and written reports.
Report in writing to the coach/AD/principal; ask that video be preserved.
Track every expense (bills, travel, therapy).
Focus on misconduct: late/illegal hits or broken safety rules matter most.
Consider broader liability: coaching, facilities, equipment.
Call counsel early to protect deadlines and evidence.
Bottom Line
Football is violent, but violence has limits. When a hit or coaching decision breaks safety rules, Tennessee law allows accountability. After Spearman, districts should assume that ordinary negligence in instruction or supervision can create liability under the GTLA—especially with younger athletes and specialized drills. Sportsmanship isn’t just about the scoreboard; it’s about safety, training, and documented protocols that hold up in court.