Lawsuit over a stray golf ball injury

[dorkman53]

Jamal Mashburn, a retired NBA player, hit a golf ball which apparently/allegedly hit a player in the eye, causing him to lose vision to a retinal detachment. He didn't yell, "Fore", according to the court papers. Only asking $15,000? That seems pretty minimal for a lawyer to take the case against a big name, probably deep pocketed defendant.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...x.html?cnn=yes

[Mward2002]

I'm hoping this gets thrown out of court. You should know the risks and potential of injury from another when you step onto the first tee box. I hope the court agrees and another stupid lawsuit gets shot down

[dorkman53]

I'm hoping this gets thrown out of court. You should know the risks and potential of injury from another when you step onto the first tee box. I hope the court agrees and another stupid lawsuit gets shot down

I guess I can be glad I'm not rich and famous. ANYTHING they do gets magnified, and someone is always there hoping to dip into their bank account on one pretext or another.

On the other hand, he'd have been in a lot better position if he could produce a witness that can say that he yelled, "Fore".

[midlife]

Article says in excess of $15,000. They probably don't have the exact figure but know it's over the minumum of $15k for that court. Just a hunch as I would think 15k is nothing for losing an eye. If it were 15k, I would think Mashburn would pay it just because he felt sorry for the guy for what he did and it's chump change to him.

[Lemonhead]

These kind of cases have come up before. They typically get thrown out because when one steps on a golf course, they are assuming the risk that they might be hit with a ball. Now, if the person was in their yard, beside the course, it might be a different case.

Lemonhead

[Gramps]

Having managed a golf course for several years, remember this the next time you slice one. You are responsible for your golfball, what it hits and where it goes and you definitely can be sued. There is no assuming the risk involved. Thats like saying you can't sue the driver of an automobile that hits you because you assume the risk of driving!

[Lemonhead]

Gramps, I'm sorry but you are wrong.

http://www.macelree.com/resources/home_foul.html Describes the No-Duty ruling

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/ap...0350/1001/NEWS A golfer who is injured by an errant golf ball cannot recover damages from the player who hit the ball, the Hawai'i Supreme Court has declared in establishing a principle that resolves an unsettled area of state law.

The difference between the golf course and the highway is that there is no reason to expect an absence of errant golf shots. It's part of the game. That's not the case on the highway.

However, if you slice the ball on the road and hit a passing car or knock out a window on a house, you are responsible for the damage.

Sure, someone can sue, but there is sufficient case law to reject the lawsuit.

Lemonhead

[poe4soul]

What if one could prove that he sliced the ball way out on every tee box and ignores that he may hurt someone? What if someone with skill hits the ball into the next party knowing he might hit someone (like on a green). I think it all depends on the situation at hand. If he is a normal person, playing a normal round and accidentally hits the ball into another, I would think he would be safe. But if there is malice involved he should be sued and will probably loose.

sort of off topic...
My friend accidentally hit a ball into a party hanging out between the green and the tee box. I think they were messing in their bags, writing down scores, and who knows what else. When he approached he apologized. One of the guys shakes his fist and proclaims "If you hit me I'll sue you for all you got.". My friend retorts "Well step on up so I can hit you." Needless to say their pace of play was not an issue for the rest of the round.

[Gramps]

Gramps, I'm sorry but you are wrong.

http://www.macelree.com/resources/home_foul.html Describes the No-Duty ruling

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/ap...0350/1001/NEWS A golfer who is injured by an errant golf ball cannot recover damages from the player who hit the ball, the Hawai'i Supreme Court has declared in establishing a principle that resolves an unsettled area of state law.

The difference between the golf course and the highway is that there is no reason to expect an absence of errant golf shots. It's part of the game. That's not the case on the highway.

However, if you slice the ball on the road and hit a passing car or knock out a window on a house, you are responsible for the damage.

Sure, someone can sue, but there is sufficient case law to reject the lawsuit.

Lemonhead

Well Lemonhead, you better go play in Hawaii...here are several cases where the golfer paid dearly!

http://www.biggolflesson.com/golfinsurancearticle.html

[newswinger]

THere is a local 9-hole course here in Vancouver that has a weird hole. The hole has 2 separate tee boxes, 1 for men and one for women. The view from one tee box cannot see the other tee box. Even worst, after you hit your tee shot, the fairway from the 2 tee boxes intersects like an 'Y' shape about 70yards down the fairway. I was told that a couple years ago that a women golfer teed off, walked onto the fairway, and got nailed with a tee shot from the men's tee box. Apparently the tee shot killed her. That was quite scary.

[Lloyd_Christmas3]

Sure, someone can sue, but there is sufficient case law to reject the lawsuit.

Lemonhead

....in Hawaii.

[Lemonhead]

It took just a couple of seconds on Google to find those two articles. Gramps' link (a company that is trying to justify liability insurance), pointed out 2 main categories of successful suits

1) Poor course design can lead to lawsuits for the course. (The cartpath went behind a building and blocked the view of the player).

2) Not using reasonable judgement can lead to lawsuits. (the guy who skulled the ball through a chainlink fence and hit someone who was directly in the line of the shot).

However, (not having read all of the listings and I'm sure I can find others on my side of the arguement), I stand by my statement. You may be sued, but, unless you were negligent (see #2), you are not likely to lose.

If you shank everything and then swing away after seeing a person who might be hit if you shank - then you are being negligent.

If you just happen to slice the ball and hit someone on the next fairway - you are not negligent.

That's my point.

Lemonhead

[Lloyd_Christmas3]

It took just a couple of seconds on Google to find those two articles. Gramps' link (a company that is trying to justify liability insurance), pointed out 2 main categories of successful suits

1) Poor course design can lead to lawsuits for the course. (The cartpath went behind a building and blocked the view of the player).

2) Not using reasonable judgement can lead to lawsuits. (the guy who skulled the ball through a chainlink fence and hit someone who was directly in the line of the shot).

However, (not having read all of the listings and I'm sure I can find others on my side of the arguement), I stand by my statement. You may be sued, but, unless you were negligent (see #2), you are not likely to lose.

If you shank everything and then swing away after seeing a person who might be hit if you shank - then you are being negligent.

If you just happen to slice the ball and hit someone on the next fairway - you are not negligent.

That's my point.

Lemonhead

...and if you see your golf ball is screaming towards some dude's eye and don't yell fore, you COULD BE found negligent, even if it happens on a golf course. Duty, breach, causation, damages....negligence. I'm not saying it's a surefire winner, but it is at least a plausible claim. Assumption of the risk doesn't mean you get to sit back and watch your golf ball destroy some dude's eye and not at least try to give him a head's up.

[FM71]

...and if you see your golf ball is screaming towards some dude's eye and don't yell fore, you COULD BE found negligent, even if it happens on a golf course. Duty, breach, causation, damages....negligence. I'm not saying it's a surefire winner, but it is at least a plausible claim. Assumption of the risk doesn't mean you get to sit back and watch your golf ball destroy some dude's eye and not at least try to give him a head's up.

OMG..... uh, er, ummm, yeah what he said!!!! Damn LC3, I just can't figure you out dude.

[Lloyd_Christmas3]

OMG..... uh, er, ummm, yeah what he said!!!! Damn LC3, I just can't figure you out dude.

I am an enigma, inside a riddle, inside a mystery, wrapped in bacon. With some sauteed mushrooms on the side.

[FM71]

I am an enigma, inside a riddle, inside a mystery, wrapped in bacon. With some sauteed mushrooms on the side.

uuuuuuuhhhhhhhh bacon, you can put bacon on anything and it tastes better. I can already hear the euro's jumping all over that.

[meantime]

If he didn't yell fore his case will be tough. It will be even tougher if he hit into a group. Nowhere has it said for sure it was an absolute miss hit. Maybe he didn't wait long enough and drove it into the group ahead.

[pmoper]

Jamal Mashburn, a retired NBA player, hit a golf ball which apparently/allegedly hit a player in the eye, causing him to lose vision to a retinal detachment. He didn't yell, "Fore", according to the court papers. Only asking $15,000? That seems pretty minimal for a lawyer to take the case against a big name, probably deep pocketed defendant.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...x.html?cnn=yes

There was a similar case and a precedent was set....as lng as there was NOT negligence ther there is no grounds for a suit...the custom of yelling fore is more ediquette than a "rule" therefore the judge threw it out of court....Same thing applies if you slice a ball and cause damage or injury...the court actually ruled that the course and the designer were liable for not taking into account the fact that slices and hooks are part of the game.

[poe4soul]

Or maybe he hit into the group mulitple times or maybe the guy was a hack and should have been on the driving range taking lessons. If any of these are the case he should be sued and he should have to pay up.

We've all seen people on the course who are either rude and mean or lack the skill to be playing golf on a regulation length course. I've told a guy that he should consider not hitting his driver after slicing it big on his last 4 holes. I told him he just might hit someone on one of his drives. He stilled pulled the big dowg and sliced it into the adjacent fairway - idiot.

[LyleG]

According to an unnamed source. When he walked over the injured player and saw the ball stuck in the mans eye socket he said, "wow, a hole in one". He then retrieved his ball and proceeded to the next tee. Crazy isnt it.

[collegegolfer]

Law is mostly based on common sense. I would recommend yelling "FORE!!!" any time you hit a bad shot that may end up in another fairway. Even if it doesn't hit someone you'll save yourself getting your butt chewed by another group. It'll also save your butt from a lawsuit if it does hit someone. There's an inherent risk of being injured when you step on the tee box. The lawsuit would have to be based on the fact that he knew his ball was headed for this group and did nothing to warn them. I suppose, depending on the court, that could be deemed as negligience since it's common practice in golf to warn others. If the guy was hidden behind a tree (or down in a valley as was someone I hit a couple of years ago) and he had no way of knowing they were there when he hit his shot then it'll be thrown out...unless it's California That would be my guess.

[Lemonhead]

AMEN, collegegolfer!

Lloyd3, what you said is what I have been trying to describe. Mishitting, in and of itself is not negligent. Not yelling "FORE", in and of itself, isn't negligent. Hitting a screaming shot at a guy's eye and not warning them - negligent.

Of course, in California, you probably could be sued because you yelled "FORE!" and the victim turned around and was hit in the eye rather than the back of the head. Ain't life grand!

Lemonhead

[flight]

I just checked with my insurance company, they said that home owners insurance covers you for your clubs and accidents. In case you needed to know.

[SeldomInTheSlot]

One of the founders of AriZona Ice Tea got sued for hitting a guy in the eye while taking an unannounced mulligan. The injured guy was already leaving the tee box and had no idea that Ice-T dropped another one. I guess if someone was going to plug you in the eye, you'd want it to be a guy with deep pockets. I don't know what the final resolution of the case was, so if anyone can find the settlement amount please post it.

http://www.golftoday.co.uk/news/year...ws00/fore.html

[Jules150]

According to an unnamed source. When he walked over the injured player and saw the ball stuck in the mans eye socket he said, "wow, a hole in one". He then retrieved his ball and proceeded to the next tee. Crazy isnt it.

if thats true, wow, i just dont know what to say, what a jerk, he should be sued just for that

[Lloyd_Christmas3]

AMEN, collegegolfer!

Lloyd3, what you said is what I have been trying to describe. Mishitting, in and of itself is not negligent. Not yelling "FORE", in and of itself, isn't negligent. Hitting a screaming shot at a guy's eye and not warning them - negligent.

Of course, in California, you probably could be sued because you yelled "FORE!" and the victim turned around and was hit in the eye rather than the back of the head. Ain't life grand!

Lemonhead

Mr Lemon --- WRONG!!!!

Let me lay it out for you:

1. The original post referenced the story which EXPLICITY CLAIMED that the golfer DIDN'T YELL FORE.

2. You responded by saying these cases get thrown all the time, because when a golfer steps on the course, he "assumes the risk."

3. I explained that you can indeed be found negligent for not yelling "fore" despite any assumption of risk.

Please review - there will be a quiz tomorrow.

[whitesox350z]

i dont know if this will be thrown out of court
i heard about a lady that put her camper thing in cruise control and then went to grab a glass of water and the thing went off the road and crashed and she won $2 million because the manual didn't say that it steered itself, as she thought it did

[flight]

That's why they should have a common sense law. That's why we pay through the nose for insurance. These ambulance chasers got a great thing going for them. A Common Sense law would put 85% of them out of the business and maybe they wouldn't be able to golf either. More tee time for us.

[ironman]

Jamal Mashburn, a retired NBA player, hit a golf ball which apparently/allegedly hit a player in the eye, causing him to lose vision to a retinal detachment. He didn't yell, "Fore", according to the court papers. Only asking $15,000? That seems pretty minimal for a lawyer to take the case against a big name, probably deep pocketed defendant.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...x.html?cnn=yes

if no "fore!" then he's guilty: make him pay.

[ironman]

Having managed a golf course for several years, remember this the next time you slice one. You are responsible for your golfball, what it hits and where it goes and you definitely can be sued. There is no assuming the risk involved. Thats like saying you can't sue the driver of an automobile that hits you because you assume the risk of driving!

You are responsible for all your shots, be they golf balls, fists, or 230 grains of lead.

I'll get my wife to wear lightly tinted sunglasses.

i have a 5% tint clear lens glasses, for cycling and for skeet 'n trap.

[collegegolfer]

The hot coffee at McDonalds is another great lawsuit people think is stupid. But, there's more to the case. The lady won money for spilling hot coffee on herself because McDonald's used to super heat their coffee. The courts found this negligient because the temperature was so ridiculously high it was absurd. Where, if McDonalds would've given her a cup that was hot, but not super heated, she would've lost the case. Because, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that coffee would be hot, but not so hot that it essentially melts your skin? That's why McDonald's lost (or so I've read). It's a matter of finding a good enough lawyer and finding something that you can say is over and above what a reasonable person or company would do. You more than likely won't win a lawsuit if you break a tooth on a piece of bone in a hamburger. There's inherent risk that there may be a chunk of bone in a hamburger. But, if you bit down and there was a piece of sheet metal from a machine you may win...because there is not a reasonable risk of having sheet metal in hamburger (in my opinion). It'll be interesting to see how this case turns out and if he loses what their reason was.

[Lemonhead]

Mr. Lloyd,

What I have said, and have quoted, is that yelling "FORE" is good etiquette, but is not a legal requirement. Not yelling "FORE", while bad etiquette, does not, in and of itself, indicate negligence. While there have been juries that saw it one way, there have been juries that saw it another.

"The court considered whether golfers should have to shout "fore" or other warnings to protect other players. The justices concluded, however, that doing so was golf etiquette, not a requirement recognized by law." From an article in the San Fran Chronicle.

While you may say "Well, that's Hawaii", Hawaii is a state of the Union just like any of the 49 other states. This was also an Hawaii supreme court ruling.

How about Texas?
"The attorney representing St. Edward's University said witness statements show Cortez was not on the putting green when he was hit and that the student did yell fore to warn the golfers about the ball. He also said Texas law states a golfer cannot be held liable for such an incident, which was unintentional." From Austin.

There is case law in Illinois that describes a "zone of danger" where the struck player assumes some liability regardless of any verbal warning.

Does all this mean you won't be sued? Of course not, this is America, we sue if the weather man is wrong! I don't think there is a country better at filing lawsuits than America. If filing lawsuits were an Olympic sport, it would be an American that would sue because there were only three medals awarded.

Lemonhead

[Lloyd_Christmas3]

While you may say "Well, that's Hawaii", Hawaii is a state of the Union just like any of the 49 other states. This was also an Hawaii supreme court ruling.


Lemonhead

First, you didn't address my earlier points. You clearly stated that this guy WAS NOT liable, and that just isn't the case. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't.

Second, you do realize that a ruling on a tort case from even the Hawaii supreme court is binding only in...........Hawaii. That was my point.

[Da Blade]

Mr. LemonHead is right on all counts. Anybody can sue anybody sure, but those cases dont stick. I have never heard of someone being convicted for malicious golfing. I have accidentally hit somebody, it ruined my day, my weekend and the entire holiday I was previously enjoying....I contacted my lawyer friend (oxymoron) and he explained it just like LemonHead did.

Gramps....you lose. Your quoting "urban legend" not law as it applies.

[GreenIn1]

my view is that if there is no reason to believe that there is a second party anywhere near the mishit or errant ball, there is no liability to yell "fore". i.e. if the area where the ball entered was thick with brush or is a wooded area.

but of course, if a ball was sailing directly at another party, or there was any reason to believe the ball was headed towards another party, the player should alert them.

[Lloyd_Christmas3]

I have never heard of someone being convicted for malicious golfing.

I guess that settles it then - DA BLADE has never heard of it. Case closed.

[Lemonhead]

Lloyd,

I read it as a guy who simply mishit a ball. Unless you or I have heard all the evidence, neither one can rule conclusively. I stand by my statement that I think if the way I read it is true, this will probably get thrown out (unless it is settled). There may be a valid claim against the course for bad design, but I hope that get's rejected. We don't live in a world free of risk, and when I'm on the course and balls are flying, I expect that occaisionally there will be one near me. If it bothered me that I might get hit at some point, I should take up crochet.

The US Supreme Court used International precedent just last year (I think it is total B.S. though). Precedent in Hawaii, could be brought in to another state case, especially Supreme Court rulings. Precedent is used as guidance for the next judge to rule on a similar case. It is not binding to another state, however.

Yes, you could be found negligent as you state, but I think that is going to easier to defend based on the Hawaiian Supreme Court ruling. My point, yet again, is that failing to yell "Fore!" does not mean that you are negligent any more than yelling "Fore!" means you aren't negligent.

How about, you see a person directly in front of you maybe 20yds. You have a wedge and figure you'll go ahead an swing away since the ball will go over them. You blade it and immediately yell "FORE!". The victim turns, and is "clocked" between the eyes. Are you saying you aren't negligent because you yelled "FORE!"? I'm guessing you are not. Therefore yelling "Fore!" does not mean you are not negligent. It's the care you fail to take that makes you negligent, not what you shout or don't shout. Did you take care to line up your shot so that there was a reasonable attempt to mitigate risk? Did you make a reasonable attempt at a good swing?

Yelling "Fore!" could result in a victim putting themselves in greater danger by presenting their face toward the shout and, therefore, the flight of the incoming ball. The person could, in attempt to move out of the way, move in the path of the incoming ball that they can't see. There are plenty of ways that yelling "Fore!" would cause more injury than keeping your mouth shut and letting the ball pass by and the case could be argued that keeping your mouth shut was the safer course of action.

It's not about "I yelled FORE, therefore I'm clear". It's about did I make a reasonable attempt to mitigate damage.

Lemonhead

[GreenIn1]

once again Golfreview proves that no simple topic is safe from overanalysis.

[whitesox350z]

please post a link, or atleast make sure your story is correct and accurate, becuase thats ridiculous

i dont have a link, it was in one of the newspapers (idk which one...one of the chicago ones though) and it had a list of bizarre court cases

[Res Ipsa]

I did a little research on Westlaw about this to see if I could find "the answer." I quickly discovered that as I expected there are differences in the law in different states. Some, as Lemonhead has proclaimed, only allow suits for reckless or intentional conduct. Others allow suits for mere negligence but the assumption of risk defense or a finding of contributory negligence frequently defeats them. No states have held that there is strict liability (golf is apparently not an inherently dangerous activity unlike shooting a gun for whoever threw that out there). In comparative negligence states, however, the person who was struck frequently recover some damages from the striker.

This is not exhaustive research and most of what I said can be backed up by this law review article: 12 Marq. Sports L. Rev. 347. It is a general article about torts stemming from golf. I also read other articles and cases but they were specific to certain jurisdictions.

[dorkman53]

once again Golfreview proves that no simple topic is safe from overanalysis.

.....or insulting flaming.......

[Golf Guy Has Questions]

I just got back from a golf game in where the party behind mine was getting frustrated that my party was not playing fast enough (4:15 total time). several comment were exstanged and eventual the field marshal came out to settle things down. soon after the other party began shooting on the green before my party was finished and walked off. the second time this happened the ball landed with in 1 foot of where I was standing. The shoot was fallowed by yelling from the other party and mine. I resolved the situation by taking the ball that landed near to me and throwing it into the lake. I also let them know what would happen if they were to do that again...

what kind of story would this be if I were to have got hurt from the ball hitting me?

[Not a hacker]

I just got back from a golf game in where the party behind mine was getting frustrated that my party was not playing fast enough (4:15 total time). several comment were exstanged and eventual the field marshal came out to settle things down. soon after the other party began shooting on the green before my party was finished and walked off. the second time this happened the ball landed with in 1 foot of where I was standing. The shoot was fallowed by yelling from the other party and mine. I resolved the situation by taking the ball that landed near to me and throwing it into the lake. I also let them know what would happen if they were to do that again...

what kind of story would this be if I were to have got hurt from the ball hitting me?

In Australia, golf courses have removed the reccomendation to call up on holes for just this reason. I would imagine tha even if called up, hitting a guy on the green could be considered negligent as the risk of hitting him is clear and plane to see. But fortunately for golfers here, part of your membership and green fees goes to insurance. So over here if you hit another golfer, or a car driving past the course, insurance will cover it. I think clubs here probably removed the compulsory call ups on par threes on legal advice from insurers. But in your particular case, you could definitely sue the guy, and I would think that his bevaviour would preclude the club from damages as he has played outside the rules of golf.

[golfaholic]

what kind of story would this be if I were to have got hurt from the ball hitting me?

You would have a bruise.

[collegegolfer]

I just got back from a golf game in where the party behind mine was getting frustrated that my party was not playing fast enough (4:15 total time). several comment were exstanged and eventual the field marshal came out to settle things down. soon after the other party began shooting on the green before my party was finished and walked off. the second time this happened the ball landed with in 1 foot of where I was standing. The shoot was fallowed by yelling from the other party and mine. I resolved the situation by taking the ball that landed near to me and throwing it into the lake. I also let them know what would happen if they were to do that again...

what kind of story would this be if I were to have got hurt from the ball hitting me?

They shouldn't be hitting in to you. BUT, if you were clearly holding them up you should have let them through. Your group (if you had a gap in front) and the group behind you were both disregarding the etiquette of golf.

As far as law goes...in most cases if it isn't intentional you don't have a chance of winning a case. If it is intentional, then you'd probably win the case.

[dorkman53]

Hmmmmm.....initial post dredges up a dead thread from the "glory days," and deliberately makes multiple unnatural spelling and grammatical mistakes......WHO could this be?

[Golf Guy Has Questions]

4:15 was the time allotted by the course and they were given 2 opportunities to play through. I find it interesting that the courses management was aware of the situation but unable or unwilling to prevent the incident from happening. Would this make them liable if the damages were more serous? I ask be cause I'm looking for case law to support my theory.

[collegegolfer]

4:15 was the time allotted by the course and they were given 2 opportunities to play through. I find it interesting that the courses management was aware of the situation but unable or unwilling to prevent the incident from happening. Would this make them liable if the damages were more serous? I ask be cause I'm looking for case law to support my theory.

If they were honestly given 2 chances to play through I can't believe they wouldn't and then hit balls at you. If they were ticked because you were slow and there was a gap they would have played through if you invited them. I work at a course and there's an inherent risk to being injured while playing on a golf course. You can sue anyone. You won't win unless you can prove the person did not do what a reasonable person would have done...aka if you were more than visible and they did not yell fore. Although on windy days I've yelled fore at the top of my lungs and been accused of not yelling it. If you would've said to them before this happened, "hey guys, we see you're playing faster, why don't you play this hole with us and then we'll let you through" it wouldn't have happened. I do not believe you asked them twice to play through. Or, you're not lying because you said "opportunities" but my guess is you didn't go out of your way to make those "opportunities" known to the group behind you.

[KoolCat]

Lawsuits are out of control. Did you know that many golf courses have removed their lightning warning systems? It seems that if a course had a system in place, but it failed to warn a golfer who was struck by lighting, people were able to sue courses and win. F'ing ridiculous.

[collegegolfer]

Lawsuits are out of control. Did you know that many golf courses have removed their lightning warning systems? It seems that if a course had a system in place, but it failed to warn a golfer who was struck by lighting, people were able to sue courses and win. F'ing ridiculous.

No kidding. When I hear/see thunder or lightning I'm almost always the first off the course. Some people keep playing even after it's lightning right above the course. Ridiculous! Those lightning detectors don't work that well anyway.

[Golf Guy Has Questions]

Interesting theory professor... The fact is that I told them twice to play through. Some people just dont have any class. Furthermore, it was a busy day at the course so I’m not sure playing through would have done much good.

The moral of this story is that there is never a justification to shoot golf balls at the people playing in front of your party. I’m sure with the richness of your experience you can agree to that.

[collegegolfer]

Interesting theory professor... The fact is that I told them twice to play through. Some people just dont have any class. Furthermore, it was a busy day at the course so I’m not sure playing through would have done much good.

The moral of this story is that there is never a justification to shoot golf balls at the people playing in front of your party. I’m sure with the richness of your experience you can agree to that.

If you honestly told them twice then they have problems. Also, if the course was busy and you were keeping up with the group in front and there was no way to move faster, they should not have been playing golf that day. I've told many a group that complains about "the group in front" when it's busy EVERYWHERE they can make a tee time for the evening so they don't have that problem.

[koltaustin]

You threw the ball in the water? Hell, you should have ask your caddie for a distance and hit it back to the prick! ANYTHING YOU CAN DO I CAN DO BETTER, always takes precident!

[Golf Guy Has Questions]

That is the best advise I have got yet.

[mike-law]

really thats very true

[famousdavis]

Jamal Mashburn, a retired NBA player, hit a golf ball which apparently/allegedly hit a player in the eye, causing him to lose vision to a retinal detachment. He didn't yell, "Fore", according to the court papers. Only asking $15,000? That seems pretty minimal for a lawyer to take the case against a big name, probably deep pocketed defendant.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...x.html?cnn=yes

If I was playing single and nobody in my group knew me and I hit a shot that knocked out some guys eye on another tee I would go say I'm terribly sorry. Next, I would simple pick up my clubs, walk briskly to my car, put my clubs in the trunk, put a couple of pieces of tape over the letters on my license plate and quickly drive away. I would rather do that than risk getting sued. No way am I going to hang around, give out my name and phone number only to get sued by some scum sucking leach. It is an accident and nothing else. Absolutely no reason I should have to pay anyone a dime for an accident involving a stray golf ball. Unless, of course, I was hitting extra balls or purposely hitting into another fairway. I would not give the guy the chance to find out my name or anything else. If he somehow tracked me down in the future I would simply say that he's got the wrong guy.

If it is truly an accident on the golf course, you don't owe anyone anything other than "I'm sorry you got hurt". I don't owe this person my name, number or anything else other than a sincere concern for their well being. I hate people that sue and I think it's destroying this country. If you disagree, f_ck off!

[famousdavis]

The hot coffee at McDonalds is another great lawsuit people think is stupid. But, there's more to the case. The lady won money for spilling hot coffee on herself because McDonald's used to super heat their coffee. The courts found this negligient because the temperature was so ridiculously high it was absurd. Where, if McDonalds would've given her a cup that was hot, but not super heated, she would've lost the case. Because, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that coffee would be hot, but not so hot that it essentially melts your skin? That's why McDonald's lost (or so I've read). It's a matter of finding a good enough lawyer and finding something that you can say is over and above what a reasonable person or company would do. You more than likely won't win a lawsuit if you break a tooth on a piece of bone in a hamburger. There's inherent risk that there may be a chunk of bone in a hamburger. But, if you bit down and there was a piece of sheet metal from a machine you may win...because there is not a reasonable risk of having sheet metal in hamburger (in my opinion). It'll be interesting to see how this case turns out and if he loses what their reason was.

That's not why McDonald's lost. They lost because they were smug and cocky in the courtroom and had almost no representation from the corporation other than lawyers. While I think this is one of the worst lawsuits in history (and I hate all lawsuits in general) I think the point is that the average juror is just looking for a reason to send money to an old lady.

[famousdavis]

Well Lemonhead, you better go play in Hawaii...here are several cases where the golfer paid dearly!

http://www.biggolflesson.com/golfinsurancearticle.html

Gramps, you need to read more. Comparing an automotive accident to an errant tee shot is just plain stupid. 99% of golfers are trying to hit good golf shots so I find it difficult to believe that there could be any negligence involved unless you were deliberately hitting directly into a group of people in front of you. Most people who drive a car are deliberately speeding or doing some other infraction when an accident occurs.

[Not a hacker]

In Oz a few years ago a guy got sued for crippling some bloke with an errant shot, even though he called fore. In normal rounds insurance covers these things (insurance premiums are factored into subs for members and green fees for social players, and also cover any damage done by a ball hit outside the course. At our club there is road running along a hole with no fence so a few cars get smashed windscreens which our insurance pays for, as long as it can be proven the offending player was playing within the rules of play and wasn't reckless, or maybe even negligent (don't know the level of accountability). However these guys were playing in a corporate day which wasn't covered by the club's insurance policy (corporate days generally aren't covered by the club as they are not in control of the event), and which the organisers didn't take out an insurance policy for the day, so the poor bloke who hit the shot got a 2 mil decision awarded against him. He was a successful eectrician who had to sell his business and basically lost everything trying to pay the guy as much as he could as he felt guilty about hurting him. It basically destroyed two lives.

[Da Blade]

This is a dangerous sport, lads..... Ive been playing and teaching swing dynamics for over 23 yrs, and I have personally seen a career ending eye injury, sight damaged forever, a fractured skull from an errant drive from 180 or so yds away, a badly chipped shin bone, broken wrist bones, not to mention the idiotic things Ive done to myself, from dirt flying into my eye, losing a firm grip on a wet day and doing a one handed gorilla grip follow thru trying not to let the club go flinging into someone and popping a shoulder tendon in the heroic effort.....A bunch of other little crap that Im too embarrassed to mention here.

Key advice here: Pay attention out there, this is not bowling where everything is always aimed down range, where you ARE, is usually down range for somebody on another Tee box

[Da Blade]

Im on a par 3 with 3 others and there is a 2-some behind us who are playing fast, while on the green, one of my group asks us if we would'nt mind "calling em up" to let them thru.... Of course I have no issues with this and say so, but proceed OFF THE GREEN and to the side where the carts are...... Well, he calls em up alright, so they moved a little to the back of the green (front pin location) and one of the 2 some hits his ball long...very long, and hits "Mr. Brave Heart" in my group SQUARE on his knee cap on the fly.... DAMN!... that had to hurt, I could hear it from where I was standing, he hits the deck howling and is done for the day, off to the doc to get x-rays.... So in essence, that attempt at kindness ruined 6 peoples day that day.... The goofer who hit the long ball rode in with "Howler" and the rest of us stayed together as a 4 some.....Extremely nice guys, but everyone felt sick because of it....All bets were off after that and we all played rather shitty for the remainder of the round

I quit "Callin up" golfers behind me years ago, I'll wait at the next Tee box and let em tee off in front of me if they want, but I aint standing on the green while they hit towards me.

[mongrel]

THere is a local 9-hole course here in Vancouver that has a weird hole. The hole has 2 separate tee boxes, 1 for men and one for women. The view from one tee box cannot see the other tee box. Even worst, after you hit your tee shot, the fairway from the 2 tee boxes intersects like an 'Y' shape about 70yards down the fairway. I was told that a couple years ago that a women golfer teed off, walked onto the fairway, and got nailed with a tee shot from the men's tee box. Apparently the tee shot killed her. That was quite scary.

I wonder how long it took her husband to learn that driver known-down shot. And where is this course, again, like exact location and how hard is it to get tee times?

[ironman]

Jamal seems guilty: Burn in hell for not yellin' 'Fore!" (if true).

I wear eye pro' with plastic-lens when I'm shooting (golf or firearms) or riding: usually amber or clear lens
http://www.rudyprojectusa.com/home.htm

I do not wear glass-lens sunglass for sports, such as my Oliver People Commander or Ray Bans Wayfarer II

The suit $ amount's low just to cover fees: he's making a point, stir debate.

[A V Twiss]

About 15 years ago a british judge ruled against a golfer for hitting another player on the course. He deemed the defendant neglegent for failing to shout Fore. IIRC the blow resulted in a fractured skull.

[mongrel]

Jamal seems guilty: Burn in hell for not yellin' 'Fore!" (if true).

I wear eye pro' with plastic-lens when I'm shooting (golf or firearms) or riding: usually amber or clear lens
http://www.rudyprojectusa.com/home.htm

I do not wear glass-lens sunglass for sports, such as my Oliver People Commander or Ray Bans Wayfarer II

The suit $ amount's low just to cover fees: he's making a point, stir debate.

Jamal might have yelled "fore" but it came out as "foe" and the hittee shouted back "no, I'm a friendly" and took the shot.