An owner purchased property adjacent to a golf course with knowledge of the potential problems associated with errant golf balls. After purchasing the property, the owner sued the golf course seeking to change the line of play because of the large number of golf balls that regularly ended up on his property.
The court sided with the golf course, concluding that the cost of relocating the tee, as requested by the homeowner, would have been unduly
burdensome compared to the nuisance created by errant golf balls. (Hellman v. La Cumbre Golf
: Associations needing legal assistance can contact us
To stay current with issues affecting community associations, subscribe to the Davis-Stirling Newsletter