Ludwikoski v. Kurotsu

Florence Ludwikoski (plaintiff) was sitting in her car with the engine running and her window open across the street from a golf course. The driveway where the car was parked was approximately 100 yards from the course’s eighteenth tee. Ryoji Kurotsu (defendant) hit a tee shot from the eighteenth hole’s tee. Kurotsu meant to hit his shot straight onto the fairway, but his shot hooked to the left, went through two groups of trees and into Ludwikoski’s open car window, where it struck Ludwikoski on the head. Kurotsu—who did not see Ludwikoski in the line of his shot and did not know that Ludwikoski was across the street from the course—did not issue a warning when he hit his eighteenth-hole shot. But when Kurotsu and the other members of his foursome saw that Kurotsu’s shot was going astray, they yelled “fore” as loudly as they could in order to warn others. Ludwikoski and others near her did not hear the warning. Kurotsu was an experienced golfer who had received professional training; Kurotsu knew how to hold a golf club and understood golf and golf’s etiquette. Kurotsu’s tee shots on the first 17 holes that day generally went straight down the fairway. Kurotsu did nothing different or unusual on his eighteenth-hole shot. Kurotsu did not consume alcohol that day. Ludwikoski sued Kurotsu, alleging that Kurotsu was negligent by (1) hitting his eighteenth-hole shot beyond the course’s confines, (2) failing to issue a warning before hitting his eighteenth-hole shot, and (3) giving an inadequate warning when Kurotsu realized that his eighteenth-hole shot was errant. Kurotsu moved for summary judgment.