Rogers v. Professional Golfers Association of America

28 S.W.3d 869 (2000)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Rogers v. Professional Golfers Association of America

Kentucky Court of Appeals
28 S.W.3d 869 (2000)

Facts

Linda Rogers (plaintiff) attended the first two days of a championship golf event that was sponsored by the Professional Golfers Association of America (PGA) (defendant) at the Valhalla Golf Club in Louisville, Kentucky (club) (defendant). Louisville experienced a rainstorm on the first day of the tournament, which left the grounds wet and muddy even on the tournament’s second day. Rogers had played some golf over the preceding 10 years and knew that golf courses have differing terrains and conditions. Rogers also knew that a significant amount of rain had fallen on the course on the first day of the tournament. After the tournament’s first day, Rogers exited the club without walking through the course’s grassy and hilly rough because Rogers received special permission to walk through a ticket-restricted pathway without a ticket; Rogers was allowed to do so because she previously had knee surgery. However, on the second day, a security guard denied Rogers permission to walk through the ticket-restricted pathway to the seventeenth and eighteenth holes to watch more of the tournament. Rogers decided to walk to the seventeenth hole via the grassy, hilly rough. According to Rogers, the grass was dry, but, unknown to her, the ground underneath the grass was wet and slippery. However, Rogers could see that the rough was hilly and the grass was matted. Rogers slipped and fell, injuring her leg. Rogers sued the PGA and the club, alleging that the PGA and the club were negligent because they failed to warn her about the hidden hazard posed by the wet ground. Rogers further argued that even if the hazard was open and obvious, the PGA and the club nevertheless failed to exercise ordinary care because they had reason to believe that spectators would walk on the wet, grassy area despite the risk of doing so. The trial court granted summary judgment to the PGA and the club. Rogers appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Buckingham, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership