EMPIRE NOTES

LEAGUES SPRING 2026 EMPIRE CASE FILE

Introduction

  • Case Overview: Involves the case Andy Hanks v. CrownFuel Beverages, Inc. stemming from the death of Ty Hanks after consuming an Emperor's Energy drink.

    • Incident Date: March 3, 2025

    • Death Date: March 15, 2025

    • Cause of Death: Botulinum toxin exposure

  • Key Themes:

    • The safety of product design and packaging.

    • Accountability in product safety versus consumer responsibility.

Fact Summary

  • Background Context:

    • Ty Hanks purchased an Emperor's Energy drink from CrownFuel Beverages Inc.

    • He consumed it, became ill, and died from botulism caused by contaminated drinks due to intentional tampering by a third party.

  • Legal Questions:

    • How did the tampering occur?

    • Was CrownFuel's product design insufficiently safe?

    • Who bears responsibility for the tragedy?

Disclaimer

  • License Agreement:

    • Teams are licensed to use this case exclusively for mock trial competition.

  • Restrictions:

    • Sharing, reproduction, or dissemination of materials is prohibited.

Special Instructions

  • Witness Scheduling:

    • Plaintiff Requires three witnesses, with specific roles in Premier vs Sapphire League.

    • Defense Requires three witnesses, similar structure as plaintiff.

  • Witness Call Order stipulated.

  • Presentation of Evidence:

    • Reading from stipulations during trials permissible but time deducted from trial allotment.

Legal Documents

Jurisdiction and Venue

  1. The court has jurisdiction for both subject matter and personal claims.

    • Plaintiff: Andy Hanks, residing in Pasquale.

    • Defendant: CrownFuel, a corporation based in Pasquale.

First Cause of Action: Negligence

  1. Duty of Care:

    • CrownFuel's duty to ensure product safety, especially against tampering.

  2. Breach of Duty:

    • Design fails to prevent tampering adequately.

  3. Causation:

    • Exposure to Clostridium botulinum resulted in injury and death.

  4. Damages:

    • Plaintiff claims compensatory damages of at least $23,000,000.

Witness Statements

(P) - Plaintiff Witnesses

Andy Hanks

  • Background on Ty:

    • Healthy, active lifestyle, died following consumption of Emperor’s Energy.

  • Incident Details:

    • Purchased drink, became seriously ill.

    • Found nutrition warnings insufficient post-incident.

Jordan Michael

  • Role: Former employee of CrownFuel.

  • Job Transition to CrownFuel:

    • Emphasis on cost-effective and attractive design.

  • Design Improvements:

    • Focus on resealable lids enhancing usability.

  • Concerns Regarding Safety:

    • Suggested adding warnings about tampering.

Dr. Devin Mock

  • Expertise: Toxicology and Pathology.

  • Findings on Ty’s Case:

    • Confirmed botulinum poisoning.

Rowan Chalamet

  • Criminal History: Convicted of poisoning.

  • Motivation for Tampering: Self-described mission to raise awareness about the dangers of energy drinks.

(D) - Defense Witnesses
Tate Pattinson

  • Role: CEO of CrownFuel Beverages.

  • Company's Business Strategy: Focus on cost-cutting, argues against liability due to unforeseen criminal tampering.

  • Claims on Design Safety:

    • Insisted bottles were safe as per industry standards.

Dr. Emerson Stone

  • Product Design Expert: Offers perspective on the adequacy of the bottle design and tamper resistance.

Alix Chamberlin

  • Friend of Ty Hanks: Provides context to Ty’s activity on the day of the incident.

Skylar Streep

  • Clerk at FastLane Corner Store: Insights on stocking practices and the incident relative to product handling.

Exhibits

Exhibit List

  1. Photo of Emperor's Energy Bottle

  2. Photo of Emperor's Energy Bottle (Dented)

  3. Photo of Emperor's Energy Bottle Warning

  4. Photo of Emperor's Energy Bottle Cap

  5. CrownFuel Advertisement

  6. Arrest report of Rowan Chalamet

  7. Toxicology report of Ty Hanks

  8. Autopsy of Ty Hanks

  9. Email from Andy Hanks to CrownFuel

  10. Grocery receipt from Andy Hanks

  11. Email from Jordan Michael to Tate Pattinson

  12. Digital comments from TikTok about the product

Conclusion

  • This case raises pivotal questions on product safety measures against criminal tampering, corporate responsibility, community health risks, and the societal implications of design choices in competitive markets.

Final Notes

These headings and subheadings correspond to the cases and statements relevant to the trial of Andy Hanks vs. CrownFuel Beverages and capture all crucial aspects, testimonies, findings, and legal intricacies of the case. Each piece is intended to ensure comprehensive understanding and accessibility for participants in the mock trial competition.

Plaintiff Case Points

  1. Botulinum Toxin Confirmation
    Quote: "Confirmed botulinum poisoning." (Dr. Devin Mock)

    • Good: Establishes direct causation between the product and Ty Hanks' death. This strengthens the argument for negligence against CrownFuel.

    • Bad: The defense may contest the reliability of the toxicology report or argue that other factors could have contributed to the poisoning.

  2. Insufficient Nutritional Warnings
    Quote: "Found nutrition warnings insufficient post-incident." (Andy Hanks)

    • Good: Highlights CrownFuel's failure to adequately inform consumers about potential risks, implying negligence in product safety.

    • Bad: If the warnings comply with existing regulations, it may weaken the argument that CrownFuel failed in their duty to warn consumers.

  3. Corporate Responsibility
    Quote: "CrownFuel's duty to ensure product safety, especially against tampering."

    • Good: Emphasizes the obligation of the company to protect consumers, reinforcing the claim for compensatory damages.

    • Bad: The defense may argue that the tampering was an isolated criminal act, diverting liability away from the corporation.

Defense Case Points

  1. Unforeseen Criminal Tampering
    Quote: "Argues against liability due to unforeseen criminal tampering." (Tate Pattinson)

    • Good: Highlights that the tampering was beyond the control of CrownFuel, potentially absolving them of responsibility.

    • Bad: The plaintiff may argue that failing to anticipate such risks still represents a lack of due diligence by CrownFuel.

  2. Industry Standard Compliance
    Quote: "Insisted bottles were safe as per industry standards." (Tate Pattinson)

    • Good: Demonstrates adherence to safety regulations, supporting the argument that they acted within reasonable expectations of safety.

    • Bad: Failure to comply with the spirit of consumer safety can be highlighted by the prosecution, emphasizing that industry standards may not be sufficient.

  3. Resealable Lid Enhancements
    Quote: "Focus on resealable lids enhancing usability." (Jordan Michael)

    • Good: The attempt to enhance usability can be utilized by the defense to show the company's commitment to consumer safety and satisfaction.

    • Bad: Even improvements may not address the critical issue of tampering, allowing the plaintiff to argue that product design remains inadequate against malicious acts.