Mr. Maussner, the plaintiff, and Mrs. Colleen Maussner, the appellant, filed a case against the Atlantic City Country Club Inc., the defendant. The plaintiff is seeking damages for the injuries he acquired when he was struck by lightning on the defendant’s golf course. On that fateful day, the plaintiff went with his friend to play golf at the defendant’s golf course. While they were playing, they noticed a lightning bolt, which resulted in them seeking refuge at the hotel clubhouse. On his way to the clubhouse, the plaintiff was struck by lightning (Shadiack, 1998). The plaintiff argued that the defendants did not warn him about weather conditions. Also, the plaintiff accused the defendants’ of the lack of an appropriate evacuation plan in case of an emergency.
Issues
The judge used the following facts to give the following opinions. The golfer cause has no lightning detection system, and it also doesn’t have lightning-proof shelters. Thus, the course plan was to detect lightning by acquiring information from weather channels and the National Weather Service. If the lightning was detected, one of the golfers’ employees could have informed the golfers. Although there were no preventative measures, the judge stated that golfers could take refuge in houses or trees or lay down to avoid being struck by lightning (Shadiack, 1998). Thus, the judge didn’t find anything in the club that could have prevented the situation. Hence, the highlighted lightning is an act of god.
Case analysis
The standard principle regarding the rulings made about the lightning case, judges have dismissed the case on bases that “lightning is an act of God and it cannot be attributed to any level of negligence towards the defendants.
Decision
The motion judge’s decision was informed by the fact that lightning is an act of God. Therefore, the defendant cannot be held responsible for the injuries caused by the lightning. Consequently, the case was reversed and remanded since the plaintiff arguments were inconsistent with the court findings.
Thoughts
I agree with the court’s decision. Thus, no one should be held responsible for natural causes. Sports managers should be informed of weather conditions to avoid the occurrence of such accidents.
References
Shadiack, M. A. (1998). Torts–Act of God–Does a Golf Course Owner and/or Operator Owe a Duty of Care to Their Patrons to Protect Them from Lightning Strikes: Maussner v. Atlantic City Country Club, Inc. Seton Hall J. Sport L., 8, 301.
