News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How did the ODG's deal with parallel fairways and no trees between?
« Reply #25 on: September 23, 2010, 10:29:23 AM »
Shivas -

As I recall, the case was from Maine and was decided in the 50's.

A couple of years ago I had a summer associate search for cases involving claims for golf design liability. There are remarkably few. It's possible, I guess, that there are lots of claims and they all get settled. But I doubt it. In my little corner of the world I don't hear much about such cases being filed.

I'd also guess that the assumption of risk defense is still a pretty good one in most places, applying no less to being hit by a foul ball at Fenway than to being hit by a foozle at Myopia. But I've not researched Mass. law on the issue.

I found several liabiility cases involving the managment of a golf course. Iirc, there was one case against a club managerment company for building cartpaths that resulted in cart collisions. There was another where paths were built that forced carts into the path of in-coming play as a way to get back to the clubhouse at the turn. Or something like that.

The mildly interesting legal irony is that the removal of trees between holes might actually reduce the risk of liability. By opening up sight lines you enhance the assumption of risk defense. More trees would give more credence to the claim that I couldn't have reasonably expected a shot to come from the other fairway. But to my knowledge none of that has ever been litigated.

Georgia, for example, has extended the assumption of risk defense to events off the course. The 3rd at East Lake plays along Alston Road. There was a case from a decade or so ago in which someone sued for the cost of repair of his windshield shattered by a bad slice off the 3rd tee. The court ruled that his car being hit was a risk he assumed when he drove down a street adjoining a golf course. Whether or not that holding makes sense, the case made clear the power of Bobby Jones' legacy in Atlanta.  ;)  

Bob

  
« Last Edit: September 23, 2010, 10:35:38 AM by BCrosby »

John Shimony

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: How did the ODG's deal with parallel fairways and no trees between?
« Reply #26 on: September 23, 2010, 12:42:07 PM »
BCrosby, thanks for that info.  I love the "assumption of risk defense" idea as it relates to golf.  And I also find it very interesting that so few cases have been litigated regarding golf accidents.  Down with the trees.
John Shimony
Philadelphia, PA

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back