Call Today for a FREE Consultation
Ball & Bonholtzer
Se Habla Español 626-817-6453

Pasadena can't claim immunity for child's brain damage

The second division Court of Appeal reversed an earlier ruling by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge on May 4, 2017. The lower court's judge had previously decided that the City of Pasadena enjoyed immunity in the case of a young boy who was struck by an errant golf ball and suffered resulting brain injury at the city's Brookside Golf Course.

The young boy's mother was pushing him in his stroller along a walkway nearby the golf course's 15th hole in September of 2011 when he was struck in the head by the ball. He was taken to Children's Hospital at the time the incident occurred and was later transported to Huntington Memorial Hospital in Pasadena after he was determined to have suffered a brain injury.

The American Golf Corporation, the golf course's management company, in arguing its case in front of the first judge, argued that it had done its part to protect bystanders from injury. Its attorneys argued that they had not only posted signs warning of the potential for errant golf balls, but had installed high fences to keep balls from getting away as well.

In response, the plaintiff maintained that their fences were allegedly too low to protect and that fairways were unreasonably narrow, making errant balls much more prone to occur. Furthermore, the plaintiff's attorney argued that, with respect to warning signs, it wasn't clear that they included walkways around the golf course or if they were even present in the first place at the time the incident occurred.

The chief justice referenced the case of Leyva v. Crocket & Co., Inc. (2017) 7 Cal.App.5th 1105 as the guiding case for the panel's ultimate decision. In that case, a man was struck by an errant golf ball while also walking along pedestrian trails nearby a golf course. In that case, the presiding judge determined that immunity didn't extend to dangerous situations encountered on nearby properties.

As for the mother in this case, she is seeking damages for not only her son's medical bills and pain and suffering, but also emotional distress and future medical bills as well. These are all expenses that, in working with her personal injury attorney, she has a high probability of recovering giving the ruling on the appeal that was passed down in this case.

Source: metnews.com, "Court of Appeal rejects immunity defense in suit by child hit by errant golf ball," May 04, 2017

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information
  • America's Top 100 Attorneys
  • Rated By SuperLawyers Stephen C. Ball SuperLawers.com 11 Years In A Row 2005-2006
  • American Board Of Trial Advocates
  • The National Top 100 Trial Lawyers Trial Lawyers
  • America's Top 100 High Stakes Litigators | 2017 | Top 100
Email Us For A Response

Contact Us For The Help You Need

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy

BALL & BONHOLTZER TRIAL LAWYERS

Ball & Bonholtzer
300 North Lake Avenue Suite 1000
Pasadena, CA 91101

Phone: 626-817-6453
Fax: 626-793-3198
Pasadena Law Office Map