SANTA ANA, Calif. — The civil trial concerning the Los Angeles Angels and the family of late pitcher Tyler Skaggs began with a significant setback for the team’s legal counsel. On the opening day of proceedings, Judge H. Shaina Colover ruled in favor of the Skaggs family, allowing their previous conviction of former Angels communications director Eric Kay to be considered factual in the case. Kay is currently serving a 22-year prison sentence for supplying the fentanyl-laced pill that resulted in Skaggs’ death in July 2019.
The Angels’ defense strategy had centered on challenging Kay’s criminal case, but the judge’s decision opposed that approach. “The conviction, based on applicable law and facts, was final,” Colover stated, firmly establishing the conviction’s legal standing before the jury is seated, which is scheduled for October 6.
The civil lawsuit was originally filed in Orange County Superior Court in June 2021, nearly five years after the tragic incident. Over the next two weeks, lawyers will argue over the admissibility of evidence, ahead of jury selection. The Angels’ attorney, Todd Theodora, claimed that the Skaggs family was pursuing a $1 billion judgment, considerably more than previous estimates of $210 million. However, Rusty Hardin, representing the Skaggs family, refuted this claim, saying their actual demand is much lower.
The debate in court also addressed the cause of Skaggs’ death, with Theodora asserting that emerging evidence suggests that fentanyl was not the primary factor. “There is a mountain of evidence we want to present to this jury,” he said, claiming that depriving the team of this opportunity would be “a travesty.”
In contrast, Skaggs’ attorney, Lara Hollingsworth, emphasized that Kay had ample chances to contest his case during his prior criminal trial and subsequent appeal. She indicated that the requested evidence from the Angels had already been thoroughly evaluated during Kay’s trial. “That’s not how justice works,” Hollingsworth remarked, challenging the Angels’ plea to re-examine issues previously settled in court.
Despite the team’s ongoing support for Kay, Theodora argued that proving Kay’s innocence would absolve the Angels of civil liability. He pointed out that Skaggs had consumed several alcoholic drinks in conjunction with oxycodone and suggested these factors contributed to his death, rather than the amount of fentanyl found in his system.
The Angels presented additional arguments aimed at undermining Kay’s conviction, pointing to potential flaws in witness testimonies and text messages. However, the judge upheld that the key issues had already been resolved in the criminal trial, maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.
Although some avenues remain open for the Angels to present their case, the defense’s focus will shift to discussing the comparative fault in Skaggs’ death. The judge agreed to hear motions on this subject in the coming days.
As court adjourned, both sides prepared for the complexities ahead. While the ruling was a triumph for the Skaggs family, the Angels indicated they would continue to advocate for their position in the case.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the events, individuals, and circumstances may contain inaccuracies. Any requests for removal, retraction, or correction of this article can be directed to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.