Ryder Cup Golf Ball Strike

if i'm not mistaken, the waivers are there as a deterrent try to convince someone that they wouldn't be successful in a suit, but ultimately hold no legal weight. i think the case would hinge on whether a person could reasonably expect to incur such an injury by attending this event and standing where she was, and whether that person could reasonably expect the event powers-that-be to have provided adequate safety measures to prevent such an injury. but i'm not an attorney, so i could be 100% wrong about all this.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Waivers are pretty standard fare these days, and most are upheld as valid (to varying degrees, based on the state). If this were in the US, I would expect her to lose in a suit like this. The event would probably settle anyway, to avoid negative press, etc.

But since this is French/EU law, who knows what could happen. That legal system is all messed up.
 
Waivers are pretty standard fare these days, and most are upheld as valid (to varying degrees, based on the state). If this were in the US, I would expect her to lose in a suit like this. The event would probably settle anyway, to avoid negative press, etc.

But since this is French/EU law, who knows what could happen. That legal system is all messed up.

yeah, what do you know?! it's not like YOU'RE an attorney or anything.


...oh wait... :)
 
Reminds me of the girl that caught a puck at a NHL game and killed her. NHL put nets up around the sides and backs of each goal cause of it. Cause and Effect. I don't imagine the PGA/European can put nets up on every hole but I bet it's got their attention.
 
Very sad for her but she assumed the risk by being there. The lawsuit is not appropriate, IMO.
 
I'm not surprised that something like this happened at the Ryder Cup of all places. The sheer amount of people along the fairways compared to your average tournament - even if you know the ball is coming it's going to be harder to get out of the way.
 
I understand, but this is the new American way. You take chances when you attend a golf event. I am sure the RNA and PGA will pay her. I hope the lawyers do not take the majority. This is a freak accident and I personnaly do not think she should profit from the accident.
She was an Egyptian tourist in France for the Ryder Cup.
 
I'm not surprised in the sue happy culture we have. I've honestly thought for a long time that the gallery had much closer access than is safe. There are times when you have a player trying to curve a ball around a tree and if the player were to shank or blade the ball, it could be a bloody mess as many people are in the line of fire. Obviously they are pros so there's that but in this case, it was just an unfortunate incident.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
At Pebble Beach each year Jordan Spieth's amateur partner (country singer Jake Owen) tries to drive the short par 4 third green. When he misses left the ball carries into a bottleneck of people (3rd-green-4th tee box-17th tee box- and 16 green are all close together).
I have written the AT&T tournament committee to advise the idiot Jake Owen to stop endangering people, but never received a reply.
 
I'm not surprised in the sue happy culture we have. I've honestly thought for a long time that the gallery had much closer access than is safe. There are times when you have a player trying to curve a ball around a tree and if the player were to shank or blade the ball, it could be a bloody mess as many people are in the line of fire. Obviously they are pros so there's that but in this case, it was just an unfortunate incident.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Sometimes the players (and their caddies) should take the time to move the gallery more than they do (before playing a shot).
 
That is terrible. I am sure the event has language in very small print on the ticket that they take no responsibility but its her eye. We all get uptight because its golf but it is a really sad thing for someone to deal with. I don't consider her getting money to help to deal with this as taking advantage. They should be offering to help. Golf will survive. People first.
 
I know this is a crazy idea, but I think it would be smart for a tournament to declare the galleries as out of bounce. Really force the players to be smart off the tee.
 
That is terrible. I am sure the event has language in very small print on the ticket that they take no responsibility but its her eye. We all get uptight because its golf but it is a really sad thing for someone to deal with. I don't consider her getting money to help to deal with this as taking advantage. They should be offering to help. Golf will survive. People first.
Agreed. I think it would've been better for them to volunteer to assist her than for her to have to sue. Losing sight in one eye is a horrible thing.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
Well that’s a crappy way to lose your eye. I still wonder why people flock to a ball someone has hit 30 yards offline. No way I’m standing that close to someone who just hit it that wayward. Actually, I don’t even stand in front (face to face) of golfers when they are teeing off, unless I’m behind the ball so they can’t shank it there, or at least 50 yards ahead so I can see the ball coming.
 
Well, in regards to the opinion of she should have been paying more attention, I know there is no way in hell I could see a ball coming at me from the sky. No way.
 
if i'm not mistaken, the waivers are there as a deterrent try to convince someone that they wouldn't be successful in a suit, but ultimately hold no legal weight. i think the case would hinge on whether a person could reasonably expect to incur such an injury by attending this event and standing where she was, and whether that person could reasonably expect the event powers-that-be to have provided adequate safety measures to prevent such an injury. but i'm not an attorney, so i could be 100% wrong about all this.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A lawyer would have to comment (paging Seth), but it's more than just the disclaimer on the ticket that's at work. It is my understanding that the disclaimer businesses try to use under implied consent is often not enforceable. For example, when the valet tries to claim they are not at fault for wrecking your Mercedes because the ticket stub they handed you said something about them accepting no responsibility. Yeah, that won't fly.

However, it is also my understanding that there is significant legal precedent that putting yourself into a sporting event where objects are being struck at high speed such as baseball, hockey and golf, involves an assumption of risk. The same is true of racing sports. Now, that's not to say that you can't sue and still win a settlement, but I think if you decide you're going to go for the brass ring and sue the PGA and European tour for $100 million and take it all the way to trial, the odds are stacked against you. But as I said, we'll need an actual lawyer to confirm.
 
I'm not familiar with the french legal system but I would imagine that the venue would have public liability insurance. I know that UK golf club membership and visitor green fees at membership clubs include liability insurance for the golfer which would probably cover this.

I've hooked a drive into a car park and dented the bonnet (hood :)) of a brand new car and the insurance covered that no problem.

France is also a bit more relaxed on litigation culture and health and safety in general in comparison to the UK. At least Le Mans is when i've been there!!!
 
I just read that article. I feel bad for her. There is always a chance something could happen at any event you go to. Every time i watch golf my wife comments on how crazy the people are for being right in front of the tee box or lined up out of the trees etc.
 
I feel absolutely horrible for the lady, she just wanted to go have a fun day watching a huge golf event. However, in my mind if you are going to an event like this you should know the risks and need to be aware at all times. It's a terrible situation but in a sport like golf there's not a ton that can be done without significantly moving the crowd.
 
I’m sorry she lost her sight, I really am. She didn’t wake up expecting to lose one of her eyes. That being said, there is an inherent risk fans take going to a golf event. While these guys are good they can hit a stray ball from time to time. Trying to sue the event is a bit low brow
 
Prayers for the woman who was injured, sounds like a pretty traumatic injury. However, I feel like you assume some risk when stepping on the golf course.
 
If you're dumb enough to stand where a tee shot is going to land, gallery beware. NO liability to golfer or golf course.
It's always someone else fault in this pathetic country.
When I was 13 y/o, I stupidly interrupted Arnold Palmer's backswing on the range, by walking too close. He said, "Young man, when you're on a golf course, always Pay Attention to what's going on". I was mortified!
 
French law may differ wildly, but if this were in the U.S. (or probably another common law jurisdiction, like the UK), she would not have a high likelihood of success on her suit against the Ryder Cup, the course, or Koepka.

There is a long-standing rule in the U.S. that might apply here, called the "Baseball Rule." As you can imagine, scores of people have been injured over the years by foul balls, home runs, etc. The baseball rule limits the liability of teams when a spectator is injured. The theory is that when you go to a baseball game, you voluntarily accept that there is some risk inherent in the activity. The team does have some responsibility to provide protected areas (like behind home plate), so that if spectators don't want to incur the risk of getting hit, they have a safe place to watch from. If this rule were not in place, all baseball stadiums would have netting around the entire field, like they have behind home plate. The baseball rule has been adopted in the majority of states. The baseball rule is kind of antiquated in that it was developed when the "assumption of the risk" theory was widely adopted. Most states have moved to a comparative negligence standard, which means that an injured person's own negligence is considered along with the tortfeasor (the person causing the injury), and the tortfeasor's liability is off-set by the injured person's own negligence. But the baseball rule still lives on, and probably applies to golf (if a similar standard hasn't already been adopted).

The second thing that strikes me as possible is that there is liability waiver language on the Ryder Cup ticket, warning of the possibility of injury and limiting the liability of the course/event. Whether such a waiver (especially one that is not signed by the spectator) holds up in court usually varies from state to state, and often depends on how important the activity or industry is to that state. For example, in Utah, if you go skiing or snowboarding, your ticket will have liability waiver language on the back. Winter sports is a huge industry in Utah and drives a lot of the economy, so the state has chosen to protect that industry by upholding the liability waiver language and limiting a ski resort's liability when people run into trees, etc. while skiing.

None of this may apply in France, as they use an entirely different legal system than the U.S. and other common law countries, and honestly I don't know much about it.
 
A lawyer would have to comment (paging Seth), but it's more than just the disclaimer on the ticket that's at work. It is my understanding that the disclaimer businesses try to use under implied consent is often not enforceable. For example, when the valet tries to claim they are not at fault for wrecking your Mercedes because the ticket stub they handed you said something about them accepting no responsibility. Yeah, that won't fly.

However, it is also my understanding that there is significant legal precedent that putting yourself into a sporting event where objects are being struck at high speed such as baseball, hockey and golf, involves an assumption of risk. The same is true of racing sports. Now, that's not to say that you can't sue and still win a settlement, but I think if you decide you're going to go for the brass ring and sue the PGA and European tour for $100 million and take it all the way to trial, the odds are stacked against you. But as I said, we'll need an actual lawyer to confirm.

you said it much better than i could. and your example is spot on: just because a product says "this soap may cause your fingers to melt off, so if your fingers melt off, you knew it could happen so you can't sue us" doesn't work. BUT, a sawzall doesn't need a disclaimer because a reasonable person would know the risk of cutting off your fingers if you use that tool incorrectly/unsafely.
 
I hate to hear about the injury, but I struggle to have compassion for compensation. MAYBE a small amount that would cover medical bills, but they all know what risks are at play.

Gotta wonder how Brooks is feeling about it.
 
Back
Top