By Stephanie PappasThe American ConservativeOn Thursday, July 30, an 11-year-old boy from Texas was forced to use a cleats to protect himself from his opponent during a youth hockey game in Oklahoma.
After a series of bad plays, the 11-yr-old player was finally forced to leave the ice, after the referees decided he was not being properly treated.
The incident took place on the evening of July 17, when the boy’s parents went to their son’s rink in the small town of East Kuskokwim, Oklahoma.
The boy had a minor injury to his right shoulder, but no other injuries.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that the boy should be treated for his injuries, even though he was a minor.
According to the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety, the boy, who is not named in court records, suffered a fractured shoulder blade.
He had two fractured vertebrae, and a fractured orbital bone.
The Supreme Court upheld the boy for injuries suffered in the game and for his treatment of his injury, but in a separate decision the justices said the boy would not be required to wear an approved cleat.
The decision by the Oklahoma Supreme court was significant, as it was the first time the Supreme Court had ruled that a child could wear a helmet during a sports game.
The ruling was also notable because the child had no prior history of helmet use, but he would have had to wear one during the incident.
As the Oklahoma court explained in its decision, the ruling is an example of the courts taking a very broad view of the definition of what constitutes helmet use.
“We do not view a child as being protected by wearing a helmet in a sports event, but we do consider the injury as serious,” the court wrote in its ruling.
The ruling was a win for the boy and the Oklahoma Attorney General, who has filed a lawsuit to have the case thrown out.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the boy by his parents, claims that the child’s helmet would have made the injury much worse.
“This is the first case in Oklahoma history where the Oklahoma State Supreme Court has recognized a helmet is not required for a child to participate in an organized sport,” said Eric Kriegel, a former assistant attorney general and an attorney for the Oklahoma attorney general.
The suit was filed by the boy father, Eric and his wife, Melissa.
The parents say that they were forced to remove their son from the game after he was injured during a play.
The suit claims that after the game was over, the child told his mother that he was going to take a shower, but was not allowed to leave.
The boy’s father, also named Eric, was asked by police why he was wearing a mask, and he responded that it was to protect his child from a concussion.
The case was then transferred to the Department of Health Services.
The court’s ruling is a significant victory for the kids who lost out on the opportunity to wear helmets in an event that was designed to provide protection for young people in an environment of safety and fairness, said Chris Wilson, executive director of the American Hockey League.
“The Oklahoma court clearly recognized that helmets are not required to protect children,” Wilson said.
“This is a step forward for the safety and well-being of all children and parents, and we are excited to see it become law in Oklahoma.”
The Oklahoma State Attorney General’s office has not commented on the case.