Hole-in-one Trial

[Gxgolfer]

Updated with Settlement

A distraught Des Moines golfer claims he was robbed of a hole in one. Adam Fisher went to the Iowa Future Farmers Association charity golf tournament and maintains the Iowa FAA did not reward him the promised $10,000 for a hole-in-one shot. The Iowa FFA claims his shot, which was a mulligan (or do-over), was not an acceptable for the prize money. In a civil trial beginning Monday, a jury will decide who will win top prize.

You can see it on CourtTV or signup on their site to see it as well
Article link

Click on Spoiler link below for Settlement

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «

By John Springer

http://www.courttv.com/trials/fisher/091305_ctv.html

Court TV

DES MOINES, Iowa — Golf legend Arnold Palmer once said, "I have a tip that can take five strokes off anyone's golf game. It is called an eraser."

Amateur Adam Fisher didn't use an eraser to put a "1" on his scorecard after he and three other members of the Iowa Future Farmers of America played the fifth hole at a golf course near here in 2003. He used a "mulligan," or a do-over, and then hit a hole-in-one.

The charity tournament sold his team the mulligan for $5, and Fisher believed he was entitled to the ace, plus the $10,000 prize that went with it.

Was Fisher right? Can a hole-in-two be viewed as a hole-in-one, under the circumstances?

Golfers will have to consult their own consciences, since an Iowa jury never got the chance to decide. An eleventh-hour settlement Tuesday ended a two-day civil trial on those precise questions.

"The amount of the settlement is confidential, but I am very satisfied," Fisher, 20, told Courttv.com outside Judge Karen Romano's courtroom. "For me, a shot from tee to hole is a hole-in-one. There's no doubt in my mind about it."

Although there was no restriction on the use of a mulligan on a sign promoting the $10,000 cash prize, tournament officials argued that they never told Fisher or any player that they could use mulligans to claim prizes. The "unlimited mulligans" promised in a flier referred to each team's over-all score, not that golfers like Fisher could buy as many mulligans as they liked and keep firing for the hole-in-one prize, officials reasoned.

"It only said they could buy unlimited mulligans. It didn't say unlimited use," said Ed Skinner, FFA's lawyer.

It was that sort of hairsplitting that seemed to tip the case in Fisher's favor Tuesday.

To complicate matters, tournament organizer Scott Herold made a complete about-face of his previous statements to the jury that the mulligans could not be applied to any of the prizes offered, including longest-drive and closest-to-the-pin awards. Under cross-examination, Herold said that the mulligan restriction applied only to the $10,000 hole-in-one offer.

"If we let everybody do that, everyone could take several practice shots and we would have had several [holes-in-one] that day," Herold said, insisting that Fisher was just wrong about the rules.

Another positive development for Fisher was Judge Romano's remark that she was strongly considering a ruling in his favor based on the outcome of another nearly identical Iowa case.

"It's a very close call. I'm tempted to deliver a directed verdict for plaintiff," Romano said.

In the end, however, Romano said the jury should decide.

But while discussing jury instructions, the two sides made a deal. Skinner, the defendants' lawyer, wished Fisher well and shook his hand.

"I don't think anyone is satisfied," Skinner said as he packed up his things. "I think everyone is tickled that it's over and happy that neither side lost. You'd rather settle up than lose. Sometimes settlements are required."

Like his client, Stone was beaming and looked like he was going to bust because he was barred by the settlement from disclosing the monetary amount.

"It was a close case. We're satisfied with the settlement, clearly," Stone said.

That's nice, but what about the rest of us? There's something unsatisfying about not knowing whether a hole-in-one achieved by an amateur with a mulligan is really a hole-in-one, or something else.

Golf has been called the ancient and honorable game, and tradition requires players to consult their conscience and call penalties on themselves.

Paul Harvey, the great American commentator whose voice is known to millions of radio listeners, once offered this view of the game: "Golf is a game in which you yell 'fore' ... shoot six ... and write down five."

[pitbull808]

That's some crazy stuff! :clapping: Every charity tournament I play in, they always have a "fine print" thing that mulligans can't be used on Par 3's. I guess they forgot to add that.

[Shortknocker]

wow, thats an interesting case. the tournament shouldn't have mulligans anyways, but if they did, there should've been something in the fine print about a mulligan not counting towards the hole in one prize

[dadriver]

wow, thats an interesting case.  the tournament shouldn't have mulligans anyways, but if they did, there should've been something in the fine print about a mulligan not counting towards the hole in one prize

36453[/snapback]

 

What a mulligan though...I'd buy that for a dollar.

[cpa49707]

Whats a mulligan? I looked all over in the rules of golf and could find nothing about a mulligan. ITS NOT A HOLE IN ONE! so get over it.

[duff76]

Whats a mulligan?  I looked all over in the rules of golf and could find nothing about a mulligan.  ITS NOT A HOLE IN ONE!  so get over it.

36989[/snapback]

I totally agree.

[DemolitionMan]

Whats a mulligan?  I looked all over in the rules of golf and could find nothing about a mulligan.  ITS NOT A HOLE IN ONE!  so get over it.

36989[/snapback]

I totally agree.

37001[/snapback]

 

Exactly. He's lucky there was a settlement because I would have defended that lawsuit to the bitter end. Maybe that guy would have won, but it would be at the expense of his reputation, friends, and family. By the time I was through with him, he would look like the biggest cheater in golf.

 

I don't see how a person can live with themselves or sleep at night going around trying to get rewarded and glorified for what amounts to a great shot, but it's not a hole in one. That would be like me hitting some shot at a par 3 then asking my friend if I could try his club, hit a ball for fun and it goes in the hole. Should my name be in the local newspaper? (BTW, I almost did that yesterday).

 

To me, it only counts if you score the hole in one within the context of the rules of golf, mulligans are nowhere near that context.

[duff76]

wow, thats an interesting case.  the tournament shouldn't have mulligans anyways, but if they did, there should've been something in the fine print about a mulligan not counting towards the hole in one prize

36453[/snapback]

 

What a mulligan though...I'd buy that for a dollar.

36855[/snapback]

 

Actually $5.

[TheLastDon]

In a scramble style event, it's not uncommon for the tourney to allow people to purchase mulligans.

 

If it's not IN WRITING that mulligans are not eligible for a hole-in-one prize, then he wins the case. He made a legitimate hole-in-one according to the tourney rules, and unless the IFAA has it written down they have to pay out.

[TheLastDon]

The use of mulligans at a tournament is simply an additional local rule that is in effect for those participating. No different than a traditional tourney invoking the "lift/clean/place rule", some will and some wont.

 

According to the tourney rules which allowed the use of mulligans if purchased, it is a hole in one. Absolutely no different than if he had used it on a par 4 and made eagle to win all the skins. If they dont have it in writing that the use of mulligans on Par3 negates the prize for it, they dont have a leg to stand on. If they have it written down somewhere in the fine print, then he loses hands down.

 

There is no other way to write his score on the scorecard then as a 1, because that's what he scored according to the local rules that were in effect.

 

This is not about whether mulligans are legitimate or not......for this tourney they are.

[PingDaddy]

Let's get rid of mulligans. They take away from the game.

[corky]

Let's get rid of mulligans. They take away from the game.

37202[/snapback]

 

 

A B S O L U T E L Y......... :clapping:

[great1putt]

A distraught Des Moines golfer claims he was robbed of a hole in one. Adam Fisher went to the Iowa Future Farmers Association charity golf tournament and maintains the Iowa FAA did not reward him the promised $10,000 for a hole-in-one shot. The Iowa FFA claims his shot, which was a mulligan (or do-over), was not an acceptable for the prize money. In a civil trial beginning Monday, a jury will decide who will win top prize.

 

I say, give him the money, then send letters to every course in the US and the USGA and inform them of his new "Pro" status thus barring him from ever competing in amateur stuff again...unless he wants to go thru the hassle of applying for am status again with the UGA. :clapping: Jokes on him I guess...I guess it is one of those things like...who cares??? I agree with alot of the guys here though...mulligans are evil but you have to remember that charitable orgs. use them to sell to make more money for the organization and there is nothing wrong with giving to a charity. Chicken or the egg question?

[ziggynotonmauianymore]

Nice par though..... :clapping:

[DemolitionMan]

The use of mulligans at a tournament is simply an additional local rule that is in effect for those participating. No different than a traditional tourney invoking the "lift/clean/place rule", some will and some wont.

 

According to the tourney rules which allowed the use of mulligans if purchased, it is a hole in one. Absolutely no different than if he had used it on a par 4 and made eagle to win all the skins. If they dont have it in writing that the use of mulligans on Par3 negates the prize for it, they dont have a leg to stand on. If they have it written down somewhere in the fine print, then he loses hands down.

 

There is no other way to write his score on the scorecard then as a 1, because that's what he scored according to the local rules that were in effect.

 

This is not about whether mulligans are legitimate or not......for this tourney they are.

37197[/snapback]

 

You are out of your mind. First of all, no local rule may be imposed that waives a rule of golf. So allowing mulligans is nothing like LCP if the conditions are poor.

 

Not that it matters because obviously the tournament organiers screwed up in not realizing that inevitably some jackWord not allowed cheater will play and try to win a prize and miss the whole point of why they are there. Just because something is not written down does not mean you are free to do whatever you want. At this point, why not sit in the clubhouse before turning in your card and tell you ex-friends, hey you know that short putt I missed for birdie, well there's no way I would miss it twice, so I am going to use my mulligan and put down a three.

 

The USGA has been clear on their position that the proper way to score a hole with a mulligan is to write down par + your handicap strokes for that hole, or whatever you can reasonably determine as your typical score for that hole more than half the time.

 

The guy's a dirtbag, so is his lawyer, plain and simple.

[TheLastDon]

First off Demo, Lift/clean/place is a local rule that waives a rule of golf, otherwise you must play the ball as it lies unless relief is granted elsewhere in the rules. It is not a absolute condition that players can say "according to rule X.X , LCP is in effect" It can only be done under the confines set up by the committee if they feel conditions warrant. Same with "winter rules". Those examples are merely instances where the USGA has deemed that the rules committee can waive a rule of golf if/when conditions warrant and then recommends (not specifies) an alternate.

 

And why is everyone trying to call this guy a cheater?? What in the world did this guy do that was against the rules of the tourney? He didn't cheat at all. Should he (actually his team) have not bought a mulligan, even though they were available to others in the event?

 

The whole point of having mulligans is to use it to benefit your teams score on that hole to make a birdie instead of par, an eagle instead of birdie. So the whole "par+ handicap" is pointless in a scramble event that has mulligans at all. According to your scoring Demo, every team should therefore be disqualified according to the rules of golf for signing an incorrect scorecard.

 

If mulligans were able to be used to win other prize events (long drive, closest to pin, longest putt) then it is a reasonable assumption that it applies to all events. For them to allow it for some events but not all without some documentation wouldn't fly well in a court.

I'm not trying to argue the whether mulligans are/should be legal under the rules of golf, they're obviously not. However, the tournament allowed them to be bought and used, therefore he didn't cheat to score his "hole in one".

 

People who deem him a cheater for carding a 1, need to realize that every team in the tourney bought and used a mulligan during their round to unnaturally lower their teams score. He didn't do anything that was outside of the rules of the tourney, he simply did it better than everyone else by holeing out. If he had used it and made birdie, and his team won by that 1 stroke, would anyone have said a thing. He** no they wouldn't have.

 

Many if not all the members on this board have played in scramble events that allowed the use of mulligans. Did you/your team use the mulligan? Did you make that birdie putt the 2nd time.........did you mark it as a birdie or a par? Do you consider yourself a cheater..........

[DemolitionMan]

How many times have you played in a charity tournament where cars or other large prizes were given away for a hole in one and mulligans were allowed? It's just common sense not to mention a lack of self respect to expect $10K over a lucky shot that should not have been allowed. Like I said, blame the tournament organizers for not being thorough enough to expect a dirtbag to make such a claim and protecting themselves with disclaimers everywhere. After all, no one is there for fun and charity, are they?

 

Hopefully the guy will choke to death on his steak dinner celebrating his grift. He's lucky he did not run into my lawyers who would have ate him alive and spit him back out to be ridiculed by the community.

 

But I see how it is for some of you here. If it's not spelled out in black and white, then go ahead and take whatever advantage you can. True opportunism.

 

I bet the POS didn't even buy drinks at the bar for his so called ace.

[tpariff]

The use of mulligans at a tournament is simply an additional local rule that is in effect for those participating. No different than a traditional tourney invoking the "lift/clean/place rule", some will and some wont.

 

According to the tourney rules which allowed the use of mulligans if purchased, it is a hole in one. Absolutely no different than if he had used it on a par 4 and made eagle to win all the skins. If they dont have it in writing that the use of mulligans on Par3 negates the prize for it, they dont have a leg to stand on. If they have it written down somewhere in the fine print, then he loses hands down.

 

There is no other way to write his score on the scorecard then as a 1, because that's what he scored according to the local rules that were in effect.

 

 

This is not about whether mulligans are legitimate or not......for this tourney they are.

37197[/snapback]

 

You are out of your mind. First of all, no local rule may be imposed that waives a rule of golf. So allowing mulligans is nothing like LCP if the conditions are poor.

 

Not that it matters because obviously the tournament organiers screwed up in not realizing that inevitably some jackWord not allowed cheater will play and try to win a prize and miss the whole point of why they are there. Just because something is not written down does not mean you are free to do whatever you want. At this point, why not sit in the clubhouse before turning in your card and tell you ex-friends, hey you know that short putt I missed for birdie, well there's no way I would miss it twice, so I am going to use my mulligan and put down a three.

 

The USGA has been clear on their position that the proper way to score a hole with a mulligan is to write down par + your handicap strokes for that hole, or whatever you can reasonably determine as your typical score for that hole more than half the time.

 

The guy's a dirtbag, so is his lawyer, plain and simple.

37590[/snapback]

 

 

FYI...The FSGA (Florida State Golf Association) routinely waives the "one ball rule" for many of its sanctioned tournaments. According to the Rules of Golf, a player must play the same brand and type of ball throughout the entire match or 18 holes of stroke play. I play in several FSGA events every year and the "one ball rule" is usually waived.

 

So, there are such things as local rules waiving the USGA's Rules of Golf.

[Everardo]

Speaking of all this did you see Jason Gore shoot his "hole in three" yesterday on #12?? His first one went into the drink and he holed his 3rd for a par!!! :clapping: :cheesy:

[DemolitionMan]

The use of mulligans at a tournament is simply an additional local rule that is in effect for those participating. No different than a traditional tourney invoking the "lift/clean/place rule", some will and some wont.

 

According to the tourney rules which allowed the use of mulligans if purchased, it is a hole in one. Absolutely no different than if he had used it on a par 4 and made eagle to win all the skins. If they dont have it in writing that the use of mulligans on Par3 negates the prize for it, they dont have a leg to stand on. If they have it written down somewhere in the fine print, then he loses hands down.

 

There is no other way to write his score on the scorecard then as a 1, because that's what he scored according to the local rules that were in effect.

 

 

This is not about whether mulligans are legitimate or not......for this tourney they are.

37197[/snapback]

 

You are out of your mind. First of all, no local rule may be imposed that waives a rule of golf. So allowing mulligans is nothing like LCP if the conditions are poor.

 

Not that it matters because obviously the tournament organiers screwed up in not realizing that inevitably some jackWord not allowed cheater will play and try to win a prize and miss the whole point of why they are there. Just because something is not written down does not mean you are free to do whatever you want. At this point, why not sit in the clubhouse before turning in your card and tell you ex-friends, hey you know that short putt I missed for birdie, well there's no way I would miss it twice, so I am going to use my mulligan and put down a three.

 

The USGA has been clear on their position that the proper way to score a hole with a mulligan is to write down par + your handicap strokes for that hole, or whatever you can reasonably determine as your typical score for that hole more than half the time.

 

The guy's a dirtbag, so is his lawyer, plain and simple.

37590[/snapback]

 

 

FYI...The FSGA (Florida State Golf Association) routinely waives the "one ball rule" for many of its sanctioned tournaments. According to the Rules of Golf, a player must play the same brand and type of ball throughout the entire match or 18 holes of stroke play. I play in several FSGA events every year and the "one ball rule" is usually waived.

 

So, there are such things as local rules waiving the USGA's Rules of Golf.

38212[/snapback]

 

OK smart guy, if the 'committee', in your case the FSGA, decides not to use a one-ball rule, which USGA rule are they waiving?

[DemolitionMan]

I guess what disturbs me most in this t**-for-tat, including the arguments lodged for the alleged ace-maker, is that is was a "Iowa Future Farmers Association charity golf tournament --- NOTE THE USE OF THE WORD CHARITY!!!

38282[/snapback]

 

Exactly, though some think this was the AF charity golf tournament, not IFFA.

[shoe295]

The use of mulligans at a tournament is simply an additional local rule that is in effect for those participating. No different than a traditional tourney invoking the "lift/clean/place rule", some will and some wont.

 

According to the tourney rules which allowed the use of mulligans if purchased, it is a hole in one. Absolutely no different than if he had used it on a par 4 and made eagle to win all the skins. If they dont have it in writing that the use of mulligans on Par3 negates the prize for it, they dont have a leg to stand on. If they have it written down somewhere in the fine print, then he loses hands down.

 

There is no other way to write his score on the scorecard then as a 1, because that's what he scored according to the local rules that were in effect.

 

 

This is not about whether mulligans are legitimate or not......for this tourney they are.

37197[/snapback]

 

You are out of your mind. First of all, no local rule may be imposed that waives a rule of golf. So allowing mulligans is nothing like LCP if the conditions are poor.

 

Not that it matters because obviously the tournament organiers screwed up in not realizing that inevitably some jackWord not allowed cheater will play and try to win a prize and miss the whole point of why they are there. Just because something is not written down does not mean you are free to do whatever you want. At this point, why not sit in the clubhouse before turning in your card and tell you ex-friends, hey you know that short putt I missed for birdie, well there's no way I would miss it twice, so I am going to use my mulligan and put down a three.

 

The USGA has been clear on their position that the proper way to score a hole with a mulligan is to write down par + your handicap strokes for that hole, or whatever you can reasonably determine as your typical score for that hole more than half the time.

 

The guy's a dirtbag, so is his lawyer, plain and simple.

37590[/snapback]

 

 

FYI...The FSGA (Florida State Golf Association) routinely waives the "one ball rule" for many of its sanctioned tournaments. According to the Rules of Golf, a player must play the same brand and type of ball throughout the entire match or 18 holes of stroke play. I play in several FSGA events every year and the "one ball rule" is usually waived.

 

So, there are such things as local rules waiving the USGA's Rules of Golf.

38212[/snapback]

 

OK smart guy, if the 'committee', in your case the FSGA, decides not to use a one-ball rule, which USGA rule are they waiving?

38314[/snapback]

 

 

If I remember correctly the one ball rule is part of the appendex and not the rules of golf. It exists only for those occasions when a tournament committee decides they want to use this stipulation. Local Rules can not waive a rule of Golf and, again this is just from my memory and I sometimes suffer from Altimeters' Disease(i think that's what they call it); if it is going to modify a rule of golf you need to get permission from the USGA. The scrambles I have participated in are not sanctioned events of any type but supposed to be fun outings to eat drink and be merry while raising money for charity