The Law Of Errant Balls

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court remanded a multi-million dollar verdict against a country club but declined to grant judgment to the defendant

We conclude that the trial judge erred when he did not interpret the documents creating the covenants and restrictions as a whole and in light of attendant circumstances. When read as a whole, the documents provide that the plaintiffs’ home was subject to an easement allowing for the “reasonable and efficient operation” of a golf course in a “customary and usual manner.” As the jury were not instructed accordingly, and the failure to give the instruction was prejudicial, the verdict must be reversed and the injunction lifted. We decline, however, to direct a verdict in the defendant’s favor, as we cannot decide as a matter of law that the operation of the fifteenth hole and the number of errant shots hitting the plaintiffs’ home was reasonable. With golf, some errant shots, way off line, are inevitable, but a predictable pattern of errant shots that arise from unreasonable golf course operation is not. In the instant case, a properly instructed jury are required to resolve whether the operation of the fifteenth hole, including the number of errant shots hitting the plaintiffs’ home, was reasonable.

NBC News reported on the verdict below

A Massachusetts couple won a verdict worth nearly $5 million against a local country club after suffering from the years-long, “continuous threat” of wayward golf balls struck by hackers.

A Plymouth County Superior Court jury awarded Erik and Athina Tenczar $4.93 million in December, finding that Indian Pond Country Club was at fault for not protecting the couple’s home from a constant barrage of bad golfing, court records showed.

The Tenczars originally sued both Indian Pond and Spectrum Building Inc., which built their new home in Kingston, about 40 miles south of downtown Boston. They settled with the builders, leaving Indian Pond Country Club as the sole defendant.

“The continuous threat of golf ball strikes occurring at any time prevents the Tenczars from the use and enjoyment of their property,” which was purchased for $750,000 on April 27, 2017, according to the complaint.

The Tenczars’ attorney, Robert Galvin, said he understands skepticism about his clients’ dismay over errant golf balls, knowing they were buying property that abuts the 15th hole.

But the inconvenience of an occasional backyard golf ball pales in comparison to the 651 dimpled spheres that have struck their property, Galvin said.

There have been “multiple broken windows,” according to the lawsuit and one particularly jarring shot on July 18, 2018 that “struck a window in the home shattering the glass and terrifying the plaintiffs’ young daughter and resulting in the Tenczars contacting the Kingston Police Department to file a report.”