SW Legal studies in Business

Being Hit by Stray Golf Ball an Assumed Risk of Playing Golf
Description Alabama high court held that a man who injured his arm while helping to pull a car out of a ditch, could not sue the owner of the car for his injury under the rescue doctrine. The occupants of the car were not in a position of danger and there was no tort of negligence in getting the car into the ditch.
Topic Torts
Key Words Negligence; Assumption of Risk; Duty of Care
C A S E   S U M M A R Y
Facts Gyuriak was struck in the head while waiting to play the second hole at a golf course. A ball was hit by another player on another hole, which was 220 yards away. The ball drifted off line and onto the wrong hole. Gyuriak and his wife sued the other golfer, Millice, for negligence. The trial court dismissed the suit. The Gyuriaks appealed.
Decision

Affirmed. Voluntary participants in sports activities assume the inherent and foreseeable dangers of the activity and cannot recover for injury unless it can be established that the other participants either intentionally caused injury or engaged in conduct so reckless as to be totally outside the range of ordinary activity involved in the sport. The risk of a golfer accidentally shanking his ball and striking another player was a reasonably foreseeable danger associated with the game. Accordingly, Gyuriak assumed that risk as a matter of law and Millice did not owe Gyuriak a duty of care with regard to his tee short for purposes of the negligence claim.

Citation Gyuriak v. Millice, 775 N.E.2d 391 (Ct. App., Ind., 2002)

Back to Torts Listings

©1997-2003  SW Legal Studies in Business. All Rights Reserved.