A Dodger Stadium thrill-seeker who bolted onto the field during a 2021 playoff game is now headed for a different kind of arena: a Los Angeles County courtroom. A judge has ruled that fan Juan M. Hernandez Jr. can press his excessive-force claim against stadium security over injuries he says left him with a fractured foot and damaged wrists.
Judge Keeps Most Claims Alive
Santa Monica Superior Court Judge Susan Bryant-Deason refused to toss most of Hernandez's lawsuit, clearing the way for a jury to hear his excessive-force allegations and his bid for punitive damages. The Dodgers had tried to knock out four of the case's five causes of action, but the judge agreed to dismiss only the false-imprisonment claim, according to MyNewsLA.
In her ruling, Bryant-Deason acknowledged that Hernandez should not have rushed the field, but drew a clear line on how far security is allowed to go. "Plaintiff’s conduct may have been criminal, but that does not excuse the duty of security personnel to not act with excessive force," she wrote.
Fan Says Tackle Turned Into Beating
Hernandez's complaint says that during the Oct. 12, 2021, National League Division Series game, he jumped down and ran onto the left-field grass. He alleges a female security guard clipped or tripped him and that several other security officers then piled on, striking, kicking, stomping, and choking him while wrenching his handcuffs tighter, leaving him with a fractured left foot and injured wrists, according to City News Service.
Hernandez maintains he cooperated and did not resist once he went down. His suit accuses the team and its security operation of negligence, premises liability, battery, and negligent hiring, training, and supervision.
Part Of A Pattern Of Security Complaints
The Hernandez case lands on a growing stack of challenges to Dodger Stadium security tactics. Recent years have brought a 2024 jury award to a fan who said guards roughed him up in 2018 and other lawsuits accusing security of racial profiling and using excessive force, according to reporting by ABC7.
Results in those cases have been mixed, with some fans winning money and others seeing key claims trimmed or cut. The back-and-forth has increased scrutiny of how the ballclub trains its guards and uses off-duty law enforcement at Chavez Ravine.
What Comes Next
With most of Hernandez's claims intact, the case is set for an Oct. 20, 2026, trial date, according to the schedule reported by MyNewsLA. Expect a long run-up of discovery fights and evidentiary motions as both sides try to shape what the jury will see and hear.
The ruling underscores that even a stunt as obviously out of bounds as running onto the field does not automatically strip a fan of the right to challenge how hard security can hit back.
Legal Fine Print
According to City News Service, Hernandez's lawsuit originally laid out five causes of action: negligence, premises liability, battery, false imprisonment, and negligent hiring and training.
On the punitive-damages front, California law sets a high bar. Under Civil Code section 3294, a plaintiff has to prove by clear and convincing evidence that a defendant acted with "malice, oppression or fraud" rather than simple carelessness, as discussed in state case law and legal commentary. That tougher standard is likely to drive what both sides dig for in discovery and how they frame their stories to the jury.
.jpg){kind=link}