i hit a worker raking the bunker on the first or second hole once, she would have never gotten hit if i hadn't yelled fore

the pro or owner or someone apologized to us at the turn

always deny guilt

how did yelling fore cause her to get hit?

Ok jokes aside, why is it the golfer's responsibility? He's just playing golf.. shouldn't this be the courses responsibility for not having proper netting near a street?

It's not the golfer's fault, it's not the cars fault. So with those two elimated it must be the courses fault. Therefor the golfer doesn't need to leave a note but the car owner should get a police report and take it up with the course for insufficient netting near a public street. Now if it's not a public street then it's up in the air.

she dropped her rake and ran into the flight of my ball

I am a terrible golfer. And always will be. So those thinking the golfer should pay are basically telling me its my fault for sucking and that I should have to run the risk of paying extra? As long as it isn't malicious or intentional or just especaially ******ed such as using a driver on a 170 yd par 3 or something...then I don't see how the player is at fault.

There are plenty of courses or specific holes where multiple shots go out of bounds every single day. The comparison to foul balls back to the lot in baseball is valid. Some holes it has to be quote obvious that a few shanks could make it over there.

Some people who have houses around the course probably get dozens of balls into their yard per year and more than one bouncing off their house. So that's fault of every single golfer who happens to hit it out of bounds? The one guy who is extra unlucky and puts it through a window should have to pay for it? I really disagree. Bad golfers do actually golf...and the course welcomes them. Hitting balls out of bounds is a part of everyone's game...and its not like anyone tries to hit it ob.

ppl do try to hit it out of bounds tho

Well, if they do then I guess they should pay. Not aware of golfers purposefully hitting ob. I referenced at the beginning as long as not malicious or intentional.

I said I wouldn't leave a note, because I don't follow balls that go OB, and if I heard something, well I would pretend I didn't I guess as I'm not leaving the course grounds unless I have to (e.g., someone hurt or standing there complaining).

Nonetheless, I realize I am still at fault. People ITT thinking the rest of world assumes risk because golf is being played nearby are either trolling or delusional. Like the poster below (but not sure which).

Uh, yeah. Why should others and not you be responsible for the damage resulting from your lack of skill?

Why do you think golf is the lone activity in world where you aren't liable for the damage you cause as long as it wasn't malicious?

The overwhelming majority don't cause damage. There are also plenty of roads where there are accidents every day. Pretty sure drivers are still liable for the damage they cause on those roads, malicious or not.

We're talking about damage caused by a golf ball on a public road. Not damage to cars at the golf course lot which is on the golf course grounds itself. If you hit a foul ball onto a street and break a window, you are liable (or the baseball league, or park or whatever, but somebody other than the innocent person who has incurred damage should be liable, I would assume unless specific exemption or warnings are in place).

Yes, the guy unlucky enough to do damage is actually responsible for it, even if it is a rare event. Why on earth would anyone think otherwise? If someone's daughter is killed by a stray golf ball, do you think that is just the risk they take for being near a course and nobody else is responsible?

Bad drivers do actually drive. A little bump in the parking lot is part of driving. Its not like she tried to back into your fender.

You could have asked this in the opposite way.

You got to play a round of 18 and come back to see:

1) a dent in the hood of your car

2) a ball in your windshield

Do you feel like you should be repaid?

For me a dent in the hood would take me a few months to notice. While seeing a broken windshield at the end of 18 holes would piss me off.

aside: I've played on many golf courses where you'd have to be ******ed to hit a ball into the parking lot but they ran parallel to a not so busy road. I've pushed drives onto the road and I'd be surprised if the golf course didn't have insurance to cover an incident with my ball and a passing car.

You are comparing apples to oranges from a legal perspective, because of the fundamental differences between consent (i.e. Pretty much anything vitiates a rapee's implied consent to sex, so implied by her/his presence on the signed property) and Unilateral agreements (which often are held up i.e. When you get a parking ticket or towed in a commercial parking lot).

But it really does is tell anyone nearby "don't come into my house cause you gonna get raped" or "park elsewhere if you don't want the hassle of going to small claims court" which -as a lawyer- I can promise you is a hassle you want to avoid.

the absolute worst is a place I practice my short game at. if you look at street view, you will see here that the place has small paths going through the course, no fences, and cars parked all along it. It is basically a human/car killing zone. Another spot where kids cars and dogs can get hit.

Multiple times senior citizens tell me that I should wait for them to clear out of the way before I swing. One of these mother****ers told me to "watch out for squirrels" mid swing. Also my bro has dinged a few cars. But let me tell you something, I have no sympathy for these people and will show no mercy. If you come near a place with golf balls being hit, you assume a risk. The liability is yours, and the golf courses. A player is almost never responsible, unless he hits players in front of them b/c he didn't wait for them to clear. Or if a player is purposefully shooting balls over a fence.

Also, ManBearPig has no gripe against the golf pro who banged his wife, because sometimes golf pros bang wives and when he brought his wife to the golf course, he assumed that risk.

If I'm the golf pro, I'm not leaving a note.

Terrible analogies itt

except for that last one!

Well it was funny at least

I am a terrible driver. And always will be. So those thinking the driver should pay are basically telling me its my fault for sucking and that I should have to run the risk of paying extra? As long as it isn't malicious or intentional or just especaially ******ed such as driving blind or something...then I don't see how the driver is at fault.

Ctyri, to your last point, there have been fans injured or killed by stray balls and pucks at baseball and hockey games before. The player was not considered at fault in those situations.

Why should I not be responsible if my golf shot hits a car that I wasn't intending to hit? Because I didn't build the golf course nor the lack of fences or netting nor the roads or houses around it. they put a course there...and then invited me and every other crappy suffer to play on it.

If a baseball player hits a foul ball into the stands which causes physical injury to someone, do you believe the batter should be held legally responsible?

Is the pitcher partially responsible as well in this scenario? lol

well done sir. well done

The fact that it is a legal place to park (I assume — were it not, I think OP would have told us that) on a public road where vehicles are clearly intended to be, means it is not a clearly terrible spot; in fact, it is a good spot. Zero blame.

Again, I ask: What if the guy were driving, not parking, in exactly the same spot? Is it "clearly terrible" to be driving there? If no, you're being ridiculously inconsistent. If yes, you are saying the golfers in effect own the road and are being nice enough to let drivers use it, but only at the latter's own risk.

He rented the right to play golf on a particular golf course. He didn't confine his ball to that course — he hit it into a public road. People on public roads should be able to expect that others' intentional actions will not foreseeably (to the actors) cause hard objects to hit them and their property at high speed. But that expectation was violated. The parker's right not to have his car hit was violated because the golfer didn't keep his ball in the area where he had paid to play with it.

Depending on course design, the specific distances involved, and so forth, I can easily see the golf course being derivative liable, legally and imo morally, to reimburse you for damages paid. But you're the one who hit the ball.


You can't think this is a good analogy, can you? A baseball spectator specifically intends to go to a property on which baseball is being paid — he even pays money to do it. He is on a property that is there for the purpose of playing baseball. He is aware that baseballs are flying around (else he wouldn't be there), and has made his choice to go with that in mind.

None of these things is true of someone on a public road (not the property on which golf is being played), who as far as we know is there for a purpose entirely unrelated to golf (the nearby park) and who may well not even be aware of the likelihood that golf balls are flying around — after all, it is a road, not a golf course.

The baseball analogy is awful. It takes more skill to foul off some nasty pitch then it does to hit a fairway with your driver. Someone parking beyond the fence or behind the backstop assumes the risk of having their car hit by a ball. The same is not true for golf. At least it shouldn't be, but a quick Google search indicates that I am in the clear minority as far as how legal cases have turned out.

If you suck at golf you should stick to the range or the pitch 'n putt until your skills give you a reasonable chance of not damaging someone else's person or property.

Originally Posted by phage
Growing up there was a course that had the 18th running along a long local road. Kids would regularly wait for balls to stop rolling from the tee shot then dart out and "retrieve" the ball. Fun times......so maybe things even out?

Well there wasn't much traffic on the fairways so all they had to dodge were the irritated golfers...

Anybody get the right answer yet that it is the golf courses liability, not the golfers? The course has the responsibility to place nets where errant shots are likely to occur. Unless you turn, aim and fire at an object off course intentionally, its not your problem as a golfer.

Courses that are next to busy roads put up nets not out of the kindness of their hearts, but rather to save their ass from law suits.

What if the damage happens where it's not "likely" to occur?

My cousins live in a neighborhood near a golf course, but their house is not touching the course (their next door neighbor is, and it's a cul-de-sac), and it's maybe 10 yards in front of the tee, 60 yards to the right of it. There is a green before that tee, meaning you would have to overshoot the shot to the green by maybe 40 yards and put it 10-20 yards to the side to hit their house. Yet they still find golf balls in their pool.