Someone sent me a troubling article from the February 2007 issue of Reader’s Digest. It was the magazine’s “You Be the Judge” feature, where the facts of a court case are outlined, the reader is encouraged to think about where the fault lies, and then the actual verdict is revealed.
The case outlined in this installment started with the question, “When a child falls into a country club’s frozen pond, who’s to blame?”
Turns out it’s an old case from 2001, but it still has plenty of relevance for our industry today. And it probably bears discussing with everyone on your management team, plus contractors/outside vendors, if only to make everyone aware of just how easily a club can become a target through no fault of its own.
The case revolved around an incident that occurred at a club in Delaware. As part of a course improvement project, the club expanded a man-made pond so it could take in more water from a nearby stream to feed the course’s water hazards, and at the same time return more excess water to the stream.
The winter after the pond expansion, three kids from a neighborhood near the course slid through a gap in a split-rail fence on the club’s border, passed a No Trespassing sign, and walked by a No Skating sign onto the pond.
Tragically, an eight-year-old boy in the group fell through the ice and wasn’t rescued for more than 30 minutes. The effects of hypothermia left him with severe brain damage. Fourteen months after the accident, the boy died.
His mother then brought a wrongful-death action against the club, claiming it was negligent for “failing to childproof the pond” after the expansion. Her lawyers argued that even when children trespass, they are owed a “higher standard of care” by landowners. They also contended that the club had created an “attractive nuisance” that was both artificial and alluring to children who might not recognize its danger, noting that the features of the golf course’s pond, which had water pumping near the spillway pipe, had not only thinned the ice, but also created “an attraction not present in a natural pond.”
Believe it or not, this case went as far as the state Supreme Court before the club was finally absolved of any liability. And with the pace of both new property developments and course improvements picking up again in our industry, it would probably be wise to have someone on any project team keep an eye out for how a property might be exposed to potential scenarios like this, no matter how far-fetched they may seem.
As our industry begins to build itself up again and present a newer and more prosperous look, that can also create new perceptions of deeper pockets and “country club affluence.” Just as we’re regaining solid footing, it would be a shame to risk having any new legal precedents set that could bring everything crashing down.
Tell Us What You Think!
You must be logged in to post a comment.