Katleski v. Cazenovia Golf Club, Inc.

Summary

The Court affirmed the summary‑judgment ruling for the golf club, holding that the primary assumption of risk doctrine bars Katleski's negligence claim because the risk of a stray ball is inherent and not unreasonably enhanced, and reversed the summary‑judgment ruling for Galante, holding that the doctrine does not apply when the plaintiff is not participating in an athletic or recreational activity.