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.


corey miller

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #25 on: July 19, 2015, 09:48:32 AM »

Kudos to Old Oaks  ;) .  They actually let these litigious people join their club while a lawsuit was in the hopper against Quaker Ridge?  What's up with that. ???   

I hope they don't have many neighbors. 
 

Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #26 on: July 19, 2015, 03:51:25 PM »
My "don't get mad, get even side" says they should put up a giant ugly fence on the edge of the golf course's property that completely ruins the property owner's view of the course.  If the architectural "value" of the golf course is going to be damaged by idiot property owners, make them feel the pain by reducing their property value!
My hovercraft is full of eels.

Steve_ Shaffer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #27 on: July 19, 2015, 05:44:48 PM »
Here's a pic of the rear of the  house in question from Zillow:





There's a pic of the house in this article:


http://scarsdale10583.com/about-joomla/the-community/4098-nys-supreme-court-reverses-lower-court-decision-regarding-leon-behar-and-quaker-ridge-golf-club
"Some of us worship in churches, some in synagogues, some on golf courses ... "  Adlai Stevenson
Hyman Roth to Michael Corleone: "We're bigger than US Steel."
Ben Hogan “The most important shot in golf is the next one”

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #28 on: July 20, 2015, 05:23:58 AM »
I agree with Sean. Everyone should have the right to peaceful enjoyment of their property irrespective of whether the neighbours were there first, and I believe that more or less sums up the law in Scotland. Here nobody gains financially out of a dispute and if it goes to court the affected owner is seeking what is termed here as an interim interdict. The interim interdict is in effect a court order preventing the club from any further actions continuing the nuisance. More often than not, that involves the club having to take measures that costs them money but there is no compensation paid to the affected owner, unless of course he is suing for compensation for damage done which I can't remember being done.


As an aside, historical courses such as the Old Course are perhaps less at risk even though clearly the case for getting an interim interdict against many of their holes would be a slam dunk. An obvious example would be the 17th but also the 18th. It's not likely to happen for obvious commercial reasons but that's not to say you might not get some cantankerous old geezer with no interest in golf deciding to be awkward.


Niall

Chris DeNigris

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #29 on: July 20, 2015, 09:34:03 AM »
I agree with Sean. Everyone should have the right to peaceful enjoyment of their property irrespective of whether the neighbours were there first, and I believe that more or less sums up the law in Scotland.

Yes, but do they have a right not to naturally interface with a golf course that was there when they knowingly and willfully put themselves in that position? Should they be able to gain and enjoy the advantages that the proximity of the golf course affords but not sacrifice anything in return?
« Last Edit: July 20, 2015, 09:50:54 AM by Chris DeNigris »

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #30 on: July 20, 2015, 11:57:23 AM »
I agree with Sean. Everyone should have the right to peaceful enjoyment of their property irrespective of whether the neighbours were there first, and I believe that more or less sums up the law in Scotland. Here nobody gains financially out of a dispute and if it goes to court the affected owner is seeking what is termed here as an interim interdict. The interim interdict is in effect a court order preventing the club from any further actions continuing the nuisance. More often than not, that involves the club having to take measures that costs them money but there is no compensation paid to the affected owner, unless of course he is suing for compensation for damage done which I can't remember being done.


As an aside, historical courses such as the Old Course are perhaps less at risk even though clearly the case for getting an interim interdict against many of their holes would be a slam dunk. An obvious example would be the 17th but also the 18th. It's not likely to happen for obvious commercial reasons but that's not to say you might not get some cantankerous old geezer with no interest in golf deciding to be awkward.


Niall

Sometimes I wonder why the US court system can't emulate things like that...... have a finding that you correct a problem, but aren't paying damages, if there really aren't any (like a death, or lost eye)  Also, I wish we could have three verdicts in the civil suits (because they will never adopt the loser pays court fees system here) - for the plaintiff, corrections, no damages, for the plaintiff with damages, for the defendant, with no damages, or for the defendant, and a penalty for "frivolous complaint", so at least there would be some chance that a plaintiff could be punished for a frivolous suit.

BTW, for all we complain about lawsuits here, a few years back, we discussed how few real lawsuits there are in the golf industry, but we fear them anyway, due to horror stories.  Also, over 50% find in favor of the defendant, and it is much higher here in TX.

May have told this story, but a few years ago a Ft. Worth attorney contacted me as an expert witness in a golf cart accident.  Wasn't really interested, but told him I would meet him.  I knew I knew him somewhere.  After discussion, I realized I was the jury foreman on one of his cases, where a high school student had pulled a chair out from under his client, and years later, she claimed it cost her a dance career, and it was clear from testimony there were other factors.  At any rate, we concluded in about an hour that she was due a lifetime supply of Advil, which we calculated at about $5K.  This was "Friday afternoon" jury logic, but we all agreed quickly.

That lawyer said he recalled every word I said when he asked the judge to poll the jury.  I spoke first and said "you could throw a blanket over all our initial opinions, we were that close....."  Judge closed up shop. Conclusion - Texas juries are pretty tough on that kind of lawsuit.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #31 on: July 20, 2015, 12:21:25 PM »
Yes, but do they have a right not to naturally interface with a golf course that was there when they knowingly and willfully put themselves in that position?

I don't see why it makes a difference if the course was there first or not. Because a course is 200 years old its members have a right to bombard neighbours whose houses are 10 years old?  Does this mean golf clubs have a defacto 30, 40, 60 or 70 yard buffer in which that land can be abused by its members?

Ciao
« Last Edit: March 14, 2016, 02:17:57 PM by Sean_A »
New plays planned for 2025: Ludlow, Machrihanish Dunes, Dunaverty and Carradale

Pat Burke

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #32 on: July 20, 2015, 12:52:46 PM »
I've asked this before..
So, I can buy one of the houses to the right of 18 at Pebble Beach, and make them change the
hole after a series of resort golfers actually might slice it??


I just don't agree I guess.




Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #33 on: July 20, 2015, 01:23:02 PM »
I don't buy the argument that in the case when the golf course was there 1st, there is an exepectation of not being bombarded if you either build or buy a house right next to a course.
 
If you buy a house next to a highway, should you have an expectation of a quiet back/front yard?
If you buy a house next to a stadium, should you have an expectation there will not be loud crowd noises and bright lights on some nights?
If you buy a house next to a busy mall, should you have an expectation of a traffic free/low traffic neighborhood?
If you buy a house next to a rubbish dump, should you have an expectation of a pleasant smelling odor all the time?
 
This lack of common sense, being applied in obvious situations is what chaps my hide sometimes.  You buy a house next to a course, expect some errant balls....its as simple as that...

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #34 on: July 20, 2015, 01:48:28 PM »
Folks need to make anologies which


1. have happened......


2. threaten personal safety


3. threaten property


Its not a question of may, but does...


If courses need more space than their boundaries allow they should either alter the course or buy more land. This is no different than if I am hitting balls in my garden which constantly leave my property. I don't believe that people give up the right to be safe on their property no matter what is next door.




Ciao
New plays planned for 2025: Ludlow, Machrihanish Dunes, Dunaverty and Carradale

Chris DeNigris

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #35 on: July 20, 2015, 02:04:33 PM »
Sean- What part of "If you don't want to have golf balls occasionally fly into your backyard, don't buy a house on a golf course"  just doesn't make sense?  :)

It's really just as simple as taking responsibility for your actions.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #36 on: July 20, 2015, 03:12:27 PM »
Sean,
 
All of the analogies I presented I have seen first hand.  While they aren't threats to property or personal safety, they certainly understand what they are getting into.
 
P.S.  Speaking of personal safety and property, does that mean anyone buying a placeo in a bad/old run down neighborhood should have an expectation that their house won't be broken into?  If I move into the 'hood can I sue my neighbor for being a gangster/thug?

Jim_Coleman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #37 on: July 20, 2015, 04:50:09 PM »
    It seems to me that a combination of "due diligence" and "assumption of the risk" should insulate courses that came first.

Steve_ Shaffer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #38 on: July 20, 2015, 06:08:55 PM »
I spoke with the Behar's lawyer today. The current status of last year's decision is in appellate court limbo as the order of reversal has not been deemed a final order by the Appellate Division and the Court of Appeals. Apparently, the trial judge who granted the Motion for Summary Judgment did not remand the case for a hearing on damages in his Order. Sort of Kafkaesque IMO.


It should be noted that there is another pending action against the developer who sold the property.


Why QR never bought the acreage next to their course for almost 90 years to control development  AND moved the tee once development happened is beyond me.


Perhaps Brad Klein can chime in here.
"Some of us worship in churches, some in synagogues, some on golf courses ... "  Adlai Stevenson
Hyman Roth to Michael Corleone: "We're bigger than US Steel."
Ben Hogan “The most important shot in golf is the next one”

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #39 on: July 21, 2015, 05:01:12 AM »
I agree with Sean. Everyone should have the right to peaceful enjoyment of their property irrespective of whether the neighbours were there first, and I believe that more or less sums up the law in Scotland.

Yes, but do they have a right not to naturally interface with a golf course that was there when they knowingly and willfully put themselves in that position? Should they be able to gain and enjoy the advantages that the proximity of the golf course affords but not sacrifice anything in return?


Chris


I'm not sure I follow your first question but if you mean should the homeowner have the right to peaceful enjoyment of his own property then frankly yes. If the homeowner is willing to put up with a few balls coming into his property then all well and good but he absolutely has the right to peaceful enjoyment and in that respect I think the law is absolutely right. It would be arrogance of monumental proportions for a golf course or any other use for that matter, that took the stance of we were here first and therefore we can violate the neighbours peaceful enjoyment of their own property.


Niall

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #40 on: July 21, 2015, 06:39:00 AM »
I agree with Sean. Everyone should have the right to peaceful enjoyment of their property irrespective of whether the neighbours were there first, and I believe that more or less sums up the law in Scotland.

Yes, but do they have a right not to naturally interface with a golf course that was there when they knowingly and willfully put themselves in that position? Should they be able to gain and enjoy the advantages that the proximity of the golf course affords but not sacrifice anything in return?


Chris


I'm not sure I follow your first question but if you mean should the homeowner have the right to peaceful enjoyment of his own property then frankly yes. If the homeowner is willing to put up with a few balls coming into his property then all well and good but he absolutely has the right to peaceful enjoyment and in that respect I think the law is absolutely right. It would be arrogance of monumental proportions for a golf course or any other use for that matter, that took the stance of we were here first and therefore we can violate the neighbours peaceful enjoyment of their own property.


Niall

Niall,

would that mean that if I bought a house close by an airport you believe I could insist on the airport taking off in a direction other than over my house even though I was perfectly aware of it prior to purchase? I cannot agree.

Jon

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #41 on: July 21, 2015, 07:26:29 AM »
Jon


There is a world of difference between a plane flying overhead and a jumbo jet landing in your garden. I think you would be hard pressed to prove nuisance.


Niall

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #42 on: July 21, 2015, 09:56:38 AM »
Niall,

Having lived directly under a flight path in the past I can assure you it is very, very invasive much more so than the odd golf ball.

Jon

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #43 on: July 21, 2015, 11:25:37 AM »
Niall,
 
I wish you could have seen this place I worked at in San Jose several years ago.  Planes flew very low, right over it as they landed and took off.  The entire building shook and you couldn't have a conversation for a good 15 seconds.  And this would occur several times per hour.
 
I would take a few golf balls in my backyard any day over that....
 
 

Wayne_Kozun

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #44 on: July 21, 2015, 11:43:03 AM »
The club I belong to, Scarboro Golf and Country Club in Toronto, has an 18th hole that plays over an increasing busy road - aptly named, albeit with incorrect spelling, Scarborough Golf Club Road.  There is fencing to protect the traffic from golf balls but occasionally a golfer skies his tee shot and it comes down on a car.  There is a worry that at some time in the future legal issues may cause us to have to do something more drastic to the hole, which would be very hard given the lake of land and proximity of the hole to a creek and a level railroad crossing.  Other than the fact that you have to hit your tee shot over the road it is a very good par 4.

By the way, the course was built 103 years ago when the road was, at best, a cow path.

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #45 on: July 21, 2015, 11:46:07 AM »
Kalen


I was a member at Moray Golf Club for a couple of years so know the issues very well.


Jon


For many house owners, having a few balls land in their garden might not be an issue, particularly if they don't get golfers climbing over the fence to retrieve the ball. Many simply come to an accommodation with the club that the club reimburses them for any damage no questions asked, hence many clubs request that their members let them know if the hit any balls out of the property. It also lets the club know how often it's happening and whether the frequency is likely to constitute a nuisance. I've no idea what the freshold is.


Airplanes are a different consideration. I suspect that the fact they are allowed to fly over or through private property is governed by legislation allowing that to happen, presumably on the grounds of the common good. That's a question for a lawyer.


Niall

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #46 on: July 21, 2015, 12:24:36 PM »
Just curious, but how does this operate viz-a-viz Right to Roam in Scotland? Can neighbours etc roam across golf courses and can golfers etc roam across adjoining land to retrieve balls etc?
atb

Ryan Coles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #47 on: July 21, 2015, 01:13:35 PM »
Sean,
 
All of the analogies I presented I have seen first hand.  While they aren't threats to property or personal safety, they certainly understand what they are getting into.
 
P.S.  Speaking of personal safety and property, does that mean anyone buying a placeo in a bad/old run down neighborhood should have an expectation that their house won't be broken into?  If I move into the 'hood can I sue my neighbor for being a gangster/thug?


Is that you, Donald?


A terrible analogy.


Even the poor have rights for the time being.

Jim_Coleman

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #48 on: July 21, 2015, 04:53:09 PM »
   Wayne:  As far as a road that is built next to an existing golf course, I would think the liability is with the builder of the road - presumably a county or state, not the golf course.  After all, the government could have condemned the course's property and removed the hazard.

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: A Golf Course Can Be A Nuisance
« Reply #49 on: July 21, 2015, 05:05:20 PM »
"Can neighbours etc roam across golf courses and can golfers etc roam across adjoining land to retrieve balls etc?"

Thomas D. -

I don't know about the latter, but my understanding regarding the former in Scotland is that neighbors and others can (and do!) roam across golf courses, especially as a number of courses in Scotland sit on "common good land."

I have also been told (by a source I believe to be reliable) that, while playing in Scotland, if a golf ball you hit strikes someone roaming at random across a golf course, you could be liable for damages. Could be a case of "all the worst." ;)

DT
« Last Edit: July 21, 2015, 05:17:30 PM by David_Tepper »