I remember the play.
Rams might be considered negligent or the dome owners management might if they compare the builds in other venues and find the Dome was substandard or lacking in reasonably significant way as to risk harm~ injury?.
If the Rams have to pay on first ruling or don't file an appeal, ,,maybe they counter sue in Missouri and add insult to injury with the building failure agreement in a parallel sence to lease breaking agreement.'The old Not in the top 75% of the league ' (I can hear Maxwell Smart) argument again.
They might have a list of medical records of injuries from their own players and claim the dome wasn't their responsibility in the actual building and maintaining aspects.
Wouldn't that be the simple way out? .
