A voluntary participant in a game, sport, or contest, assumes all risks incidental to the particular game, sport, or contest which are obvious and foreseeable. However, he or she does not assume an extraordinary risk which is not normally incident to the game or sport. Even where the assumption of the risk doctrine applies, defendants have a duty to use due care not to increase the risks to a participant over and above those inherent in the sport. While under the doctrine of assumption of risk, a defendant has no legal duty to eliminate or protect a plaintiff from the risks inherent in a sport, but the defendant owes a duty not to increase the inherent risks. To determine whether the primary assumption of risk doctrine applies to a sports participant, the court must decide whether the injury suffered arises from a risk inherent in the sport, and whether imposing a duty might fundamentally alter the nature of the sport.
A person who operates a place of public amusement or entertainment must exercise reasonable care with regard to the construction, maintenance, and management of his buildings or structures and his premises, having regard to the character of entertainment given and the customary conduct of persons attending such entertainment. The operator must employ sufficient personnel to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition. He or she must use ordinary care to maintain the floors and aisles along which patrons are expected to pass in a reasonably safe condition for their use; and this principle has been applied in cases where personal injury resulted from a slippery floor, aisle, ramp or walkway, defective carpet, or the presence of an object the floor or in the aisle.
Title: New York Complaint Against Owner of Golf Course by Patron of Driving Range Struck by Golf Club Keywords: New York, complaint against owner, golf course, driving range, patron, struck by golf club, legal action. Introduction: In this detailed description, we examine a New York complaint against the owner of a golf course filed by a patron of the driving range who was struck by a golf club. This incident has led to legal action highlighting the responsibility of the golf course owner in providing a safe and secure environment for patrons. 1. Negligence and Premise Liability Lawsuit: In this type of complaint, the patron injured by a golf club while in the driving range pursues legal action against the golf course owner under premises liability laws. The complaint alleges that the owner failed to take necessary precautions to prevent accidents, adequately maintain the driving range, or properly supervise patrons and club users. 2. Personal Injury Claim: This specific complaint falls under the category of personal injury, as the patron suffered harm due to the negligence of the golf course owner. It emphasizes the responsibility of the owner to mitigate the risk of accidents and provide a safe environment for all patrons. 3. Lack of Safety Measures: The complaint may involve allegations of failing to implement safety measures such as adequate signage, protective barriers, or staff supervision in the driving range. It may further argue that the absence of these precautions directly contributed to the patron being struck by a golf club. 4. Duty of Care: The complaint argues that the golf course owner breached their duty of care toward patrons, highlighting their obligation to maintain safe premises and protect against reasonably foreseeable hazards. It establishes that the owner's negligence directly caused the patron's injuries. 5. Seeking Compensation: The complaint seeks compensation for various damages incurred by the patron, including medical expenses, pain and suffering, loss of income, and any other related losses or disabilities resulting from the accident. The monetary value sought is determined by assessing the nature and severity of the injuries and their impact on the patron's life. 6. Legal Proceedings: The complaint initiates a formal legal process against the owner, including the filing of necessary documents, court appearances, and negotiations. The case may go to trial, where evidence and witnesses are presented to establish liability and determine appropriate compensation. Conclusion: This New York complaint against the owner of a golf course by a patron struck by a golf club highlights the importance of maintaining a safe environment within a golf course. By filing this complaint, the injured patron seeks justice for the negligence of the golf course owner, aiming to obtain compensation for the damages suffered as a result of the incident.
