By Rob Harris, of Golfdisputeresolution.com
A New York appellate court in Rose v. Tee-Bird Golf Club,Inc., has held that a golf facility could be held liable for a golfer injured in a cart accident, when the carts tires were worn.
As the court explained:
“a golf cart with bald tires rented to someone unfamiliar with the course on a day when wet leaves covered a steep and winding section of the cart path could create a situation where the occupants of the cart were exposed to a hazard beyond the normal dangers associated with golfing in such conditions.”
Now, a federal appeals court in New York has reached a contrary result, dismissing the claims of golfer Minho Hahn, who was injured in a cart accident at the Philip J. Rotella Memorial Golf Course in West Haverstraw. The court described the event as follows:
“After Hahn and some friends teed off at Hole Five, the group proceeded along the path and down a slope toward the green in two golf carts. Two of Hahn’s friends rode together in one cart, and Hahn traveled alone behind. Hahn testified at his deposition that the cart path looked as it did in the past and that he proceeded down the hill ‘as usual.’ The right front wheel of his cart struck a stone seven to eight inches in diameter, causing the wheel of the cart to turn left, carrying him about thirty feet down an eighteen-to-twenty-two degree slope and into a tree. The collision with the tree injured Hahn’s knee and leg.”
Hahn’s lawsuit alleged that “the Town was negligent in (1) allowing the rock or piece of debris to remain on the cart path, or (2) failing to install a guardrail along that portion of the cart path.”
Determining that Hahn’s case should be dismissed, the court emphasized that:
“the undisputed evidence demonstrates that the cart path was an open and obvious part of the golf course terrain. Its conditions, including the steepness of the hill and the potential for small hazards to appear on the path, surely were well known to Hahn, who had played at Rotella Memorial and traversed the cart path (and countless others like it) numerous times before the accident. There is no genuine dispute that the topography of Rotella Memorial was open and obvious (certainly to the experienced Hahn), and Hahn’s risk of injury while driving on the cart path was inherent in his choice.”
Distinguishing Hahn’s case from the Rose v. Tee-Bird Golf Club case, the court explained that Rose v. Tee-Bird Golf Club “turned on a question of fact as to whether the golf cart there involved had bald tires, which the court held is not a normal danger associated with golfing.” Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Chauvin, J.), entered December 19, 2012 in Saratoga County, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
