Justice as Elusive as Bonds’ Home Run Ball:
$1 Million at Stake in City Court Case

SAN FRANCISCO -- The fierce struggle in the stands for Barry Bonds’ season record 73rd home run ball is ending in an equally ferocious battle inside a courtroom here with attorneys tangling over complex questions of property law.

Attorneys for Patrick Hayashi, 37, and Alex Popov, 38, issued their closing statements yesterday in front of an engaged courtroom audience that included members of the media, a legal professor, and a documentary filmmaker. Hayashi and Popov both claim their right to the ball in what is a groundbreaking legal case.

On Oct. 7, 2001, Bonds hit a ball over the right field fence at Pacific Bell Park in a standing room only section. The ball landed in Popov’s mitt before fans in his vicinity knocked him to the ground and fell on top of him. When he arose from the pile, Popov discovered a ball labeled "sucker" in ink pen in his glove—one of the many balls of the kind dispersed by fans that day. The genuine home run ball had been recovered by Hayashi. Shortly thereafter, Hayashi was whisked away by security with Popov following behind demanding his rights to the prized "piece of baseball history."

"This is a very difficult case," admitted Judge Kevin McCarthy while in session. "This case has some real problems."

McCarthy interrupted both attorneys during their closing statements to inquire about their views on how a catch should be defined and whether the mob attack on Popov should be a factor in the case.

The judge acknowledged his concern over the "wrongful acts" committed by some of the fans on Popov during the scrap for the ball and how their actions could be legally remedied.

"You can’t sue a mob," said McCarthy.

"At six feet tall, Alex raised his hand above the rest, caught the ball, and he was the first person to catch the ball," said Martin Triano, attorney for the plaintiff. "The ball belongs to him."

Popov said he was bruised, scratched and that "my shoulder still hurts" from the mad scramble. Popov claims someone on the ground took the ball from his glove once he went down.

Replays from the video tape shot by KNTV Channel 11 cameraman Josh Keppel show Popov held the ball for six-tenths of a second before his mitt moves out of view of the camera.

"He never had control of the ball," said Mike Lee, defense attorney for Hayashi, who claims the ball was hanging slightly out of the glove in the video replay. "The burden of proof is on the plaintiff and nobody saw him with the home run ball in his mitt from the time he fell."

Lee added that major league umpire Jim Evans had testified earlier in the trial that in his 20-year major league career most balls he’d witnessed weren’t controlled by fans who touched the ball first. And only on two occasions had Evans testified to seeing a fan give the ball to the person who had touched it first.

"If every person who touches a ball first is granted ownership, it will cause enforceability problems in ballparks throughout America," said Lee.

In the trial that lasted 14 days, the plaintiffs hired three legal professors to the defense’s one. Professor Brian Gray, a property law instructor as Hastings Law School in San Francisco co-counseled for the defense. Gray proposed a new rule, affectionately dubbed "Gray’s Rule" by Judge McCarthy, which stated that a catch by a fan involves control of the ball inside the mitt or any other "receptacle."

"If the ball is dislodged by the fan’s incidental contact…it remains a loose ball," Gray said in a written statement to the judge.

Until now, no one has attempted to define a fan’s catch. McCarthy made no indication of whether he will accept or reject Gray’s proposed definition.

The judge appeared irresolute yesterday, according to Mike Wranovics, a freelance documentary filmmaker who has followed the dispute for the ball for the past year in the making of his movie "Up for Grabs."

"I think (the judge) is having a lot of trouble making a decision for one or the other," said Wranovics.

"He seems to be leaving the possibility that the ball could be auctioned off and then the profits could be split 50-50, or 75-25," said Wranovics.

Sports memorabilia experts have estimated the ball’s value at around $1 million.