When someone injures another person, justice can come in one of two forms — from the criminal justice system or the civil justice system.
The man who was allegedly attacked by former NFL quarterback and current Fox analyst Mark Sanchez is seeking relief in both forums.
Via TMZ.com, 69-year-old Perry Tole [has sued Sanchez and Fox](https://www.tmz.com/2025/10/06/mark-sanchez-alleged-victim-lawsuit/) for injuries arising from the incident that happened early Saturday in Indianapolis, where Sanchez was preparing to call the Raiders-Colts game for Fox.
The claims against Sanchez will be direct and clear: Assault, battery, and possibly other related legal theories arising from the things Sanchez allegedly did during the altercation. The claims against Fox are based on legal theories of negligent hiring, negligent retention, and negligent supervision, with a specific allegation that Sanchez has a “‘propensity for drinking and/or harmful conduct.’”
Tole contends that he has suffered severe permanent disfigurement, loss of function, other physical injuries, emotional distress, and other damages, with injuries to his head, jaw, and neck. [Graphic photos](https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/indianapolis-fox-cbs-affiliates-publish-photos-of-victim-in-mark-sanchez-incident) posted by the local Fox and CBS affiliates on Sunday show a battered man with an apparently significant gash in his left cheek. He was also wearing a brace on his neck.
No, Fox is not responsible for the unforeseeable criminal misconduct of its employees. If, however, Fox knew or had reason to know that Sanchez had the capacity to engage in such behavior, Fox has potential liability.
Ultimately, the case against Fox will turn on the facts developed during the discovery process and the legal standards in Indiana regarding an employer’s responsibility to protect others from misdeeds of its employees.
Tole’s lawyer will logically seek any and all evidence of other incidents involving Sanchez during his time with Fox or before he was hired, questioning all colleagues about his habits while at company functions or when traveling for Fox assignments. Does Sanchez routinely drink to excess? How does he behave when he is intoxicated? Have there been incidents with coworkers? Others?
Where did Sanchez go on Friday before the incident? Was he at a Fox-arranged event, drinking with colleagues? Did anyone think he seemed to be overserved? Were arrangements made to get him back to the hotel safely? Or was he left to stumble through Indianapolis?
These are all fair questions. Fox brought a team of employees to Indianapolis to work a football game. Fox owes a basic duty of care to the citizens of Indianapolis. Pole’s lawyers will have every right to ask tough questions aimed at figuring out whether Fox exercised reasonable care — or any care at all — to protect innocent bystanders from potentially foreseeable interactions with intoxicated Fox employees.
Skeptics will dismiss the case as a money grab. But Tole didn’t ask for this. Like anyone who suffers injuries in an incident they did not cause, it’s always better to have been left alone and to have no reason to sue anyone. Whether the money comes from Sanchez, Fox, or both, Tole is entitled to compensation for injuries he suffered, if the incident occurred the way the authorities in Indianapolis believe it did.