Barry Bartholomew & Associates and Kathryn Albarian for Defendant and Appellant.
Knickerbocker Law Corporation, Richard L. Knickerbocker, Gregory G. Yacoubian; Michael H. Silvers, a Law Corporation, and Michael H. Silvers for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Story continue from Part I ……..
American Golf relied on Dilger v. Moyles (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 1452 (Dilger), which held that the primary assumption of risk doctrine barred a golfer's suit against another golfer, after the former was hit by a golf ball being shot from an adjacent fairway. The court concluded that the risk of errant shots was inherent in the sport and that â€
Description
Where golfer failed to confirm another person's location before teeing off, and his ball hit other person in head, doctrine of primary assumption of risk did not bar negligence claim. There were triable issues of fact as to whether golfer's conduct in failing to confirm other person's location when he teed off increased inherent risks of sport and, in turn, whether other person's conduct was comparatively negligent. Where trial court erroneously granted golfer's summary judgment motion based on doctrine of assumption of risk but then realized error and granted other person's motion for new trial and orally conveyed reasons for ruling, court's order granting new trial was defective but not void where court's minute order failed to state grounds or to specify reasons on which motion was granted and would be upheld on appeal where it accurately reflected law of assumption of risk. Defendant's typographical error in affirmative defense section of answer that referred to skiing instead of golfing was harmless error, not a fatal flaw to proper pleading of affirmative defense.
