Tennis Forum banner
1 - 10 of 11 Posts

· Registered
75 Posts
Here is an article from an actual lawyer:
Bouchard vs USTA and USTA National Tennis Center, the Answer | Pro Tennis Law

He believes that, even if Bouchard was unauthorized to enter the room, the USTA was negligant.

I have not yet been inside Arthur Ashe Stadium during the US Open, although I was there with my daughter while she auditioned to sing the National Anthem several years ago. I am not aware of what the rules of the house are as far as accessing certain areas, but this argument is similar to one about not sticking your hand in the lion’s cage at the zoo. The only difference is that it is obvious that the lion can bite your arm off, it isn’t obvious that a room, even if it were “off limits,” would be a dangerous trap for anyone entering without proper authorization. It reminds me of the old man trap and spring gun cases from law school. As an illustration, say that an employee of the USTA entered the room, who was clearly authorized to enter the room, and was unaware of a wet floor and fell…it would probably make sense that a warning sign that says…wait for it…”Wet Floor” be placed to warn of the non-obvious condition to let the authorized party know of the potentially hazardous condition.

In paragraph 51 of the Answer, again there is mention of “…express consent of, or accompaniment of, authorized personal.” I don’t have enough facts about the way the tournament is operated to speculate on how this argument may pan out for the USTA but on the surface it seems pretty weak. If they knew what was in that room was dangerous, they could have simply put up a sign that said, wait for it…wait for it… “Caution, wet floor” I know, that is a little over the top to suggest, but it is possible.
1 - 10 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.