By: Rob Harris

By now, most have heard about the break in at the USGA Museum, with the sole burglar apparently taking only two items: the USGA Men’s Amateur Trophy and the replica of the Hickok Belt won by Ben Hogan for being the nation’s best male athlete in 1953.

Others have beaten me to the jokes about likely suspects and Ebay sales. I particularly like Jonathan Wall’s column which you can access here.

By: Rob Harris

Congratulations to Ryan Munson and Eric Fox, on solid rounds of 69 and 74, at River Oaks Golf Club in Edmond, Oklahoma. Of course, they lost by 14 and 19 shots, respectively, to Rhein Gibson, who shot 55. Read here for more about  this remarkable round.

By: Rob Harris

In August 2010, Troy Peissig recorded his 4th lifetime hole-in-one, including his second on the 12th hole at Missoula (Montana) Country Club. This time, however, Peissig wouldn’t just be buying drinks, as he had won an $18,000 charity hole-in-won contest. So he thought…..

Typical of such events, the charity had arranged for insurance from the aptly named enterprise, hole-in-won.com.

When informed about the ace, the company’s owner, Kevin Kolenda, denied coverage, asserting that the scorecard indicated the 12th hole is only 130 yards, while the insurance policy required the hole to be at least 165 yards.

Tournament sponsors, however, provided witness statements and satellite imagery demonstrating that the hole had been lengthened for the tournament to 170 yards.

Kolenda remained defiant, refused to pay, and now faces felony charges brought by the Montana commissioner of securities and insurance.

Reportedly, Kolenda has failed to pay other hole-in-oners, and has been sanctioned by regulators in Alabama, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Nevada, North Carolina, and Washington. Indeed, in 2009, the Connecticut Insurance Department imposed a fine of $5.9 million.

For reasons best explained by Mr. Kolenda, the hole-in-won.com website indicates that “the hole-in-one or other prize covered contracts of Hole-in-won, Hole-in-won.com, Hole-in worldwide or Kevin Kolenda are not available in the state of Connecticut or to Connecticut residents.”

By: Rob Harris

I recall watching Dave Stockton on the practice tee at the Greater Greensboro Open in 1970. At the tournament with my father, we watched the young pro–who later that year won the PGA Championship–receiving instruction from his father, Gail, who was himself a golf professional.

Stockton, of course, has had an illustrious career. He went on to win the PGA Championship for a second time, together with 22 additional wins on the PGA and Champions Tours, he coached the United States team in the Ryder Cup at Kiawah, and he’s a well known putting guru.

Well, now, Stockton is an arbitrator-certified internet personality, with the legal right to keep third parties from trading on his name.

On May 12, an arbitrator for the National Arbitration Forum handed down a decision in favor of Stockton against a company that had registered the domain name “stocktongolf.com.” The respondent company, Global Advertizing, secures rights to hundreds of theme-oriented websites, and then peddles space on the various sites to companies that wish to promote their products.

True to form, after registering stocktongolf.com, the respondent displayed on the site advertisements for golf-related products and services. Stockton filed an arbitration demand, claiming that the domain name unlawfully exploited the goodwill of the Stockton name, and would create confusion among the consuming public that they were interacting with him rather than an unrelated outsider.

The respondent asserted it was not trading on Dave Stockton’s name, but rather that the site was geographically linked to cities named Stockton that were found in twelve distinct states in the U.S., including California.

Although the respondent company claimed it had not heard of Dave Stockton before the dispute arose, the arbitrator disbelieved that assertion, finding that “the Respondent must have been aware of Dave Stockton’s activities as a golfer when it registered the disputed domain name, which includes the word ‘golf.’”

According to the arbitrator, “the Respondent is using [Stockton's] well-known name to attract Internet users to the Respondent’s web site for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with [Stockton's] well-known mark.” Therefore, the arbitrator ordered that the domain name be transferred to Stockton.

Probably the last thought on the mind of young Dave on the practice tee in 1970.

By: Rob Harris

I continue to be amazed at the capabilities of my fellow attorneys. At 8:00 a.m. this morning, Golfsmith issued a press release announcing that it was being acquired by Canadian company Golf Town.

Less than four hours later, at 11:41 a.m., a law firm had issued its own press release, announcing an investigation of Golfsmith’s board of directors “for possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law in connection with the sale.” As the firm’s announcement stated, “the investigation concerns whether the Golfsmith Board of Directors breached their fiduciary duties to Golfsmith stockholders by failing to adequately shop the Company before entering into this transaction and whether Golf Town is underpaying for Golfsmith shares, thus unlawfully harming Golfsmith stockholders.”

Thus, on a Monday morning, when most of sluggish workplace America was still caffeinating itself, this “can do” group of attorneys had (presumably) learned of the Golfsmith announcement, assessed its terms, determined that something was sufficiently amiss to warrant the commencement of an investigation, and managed to insert on its website a form to which readers of the firm’s announcement could link if they want “to learn how to join the action” (which, of course, would only be brought if the as-yet-unconducted investigation reveals a meritorious basis). If nothing else, the firm’s overachieving webmaster has earned his holiday bonus.

Not to be outdone, by 4:00 p.m., five additional law firms had announced their own investigations.

Not since TaylorMade announced its plans to acquire Adams Golf in March has there been so much investigating going on in the golf world.

Gee, I’m glad I’m a lawyer.

By: Rob Harris

Several weeks ago, we reported on a golf condominium community’s divisiveness regarding the question of whether to raise and invest substantial funds in improvements to the irrigation system and clubhouse. The issue has been portrayed as pitting the golf playing minority against the majority of residents who feel they have been forced to fund a money losing golf amenity.

Last week, the issue was presented to the residents for vote. By a substantial majority, the residents voted against raising their condominium fees to fund the capital improvement projects.

The rejection of the proposal begs the question of  “what next for the golf facility?” A leader of the opposition has advanced six ideas:

1. Sell it.

2. Hire an outside company to run it.

3. Lease it to a private company or the town.

4. Members form an LLC and purchase it.

5. Reduce the course to nine holes and open it up to the public.

6. Close the course and turn it into a giant park available for use by all.

Other communities have faced circumstances similar to those at Farmington Woods. With the most recent exercise in ownership democracy, it will be interesting to see what happens next, as this community addresses issues of preservation of real estate values, and the benefits (at least to some) of a golf amenity.

By: Rob Harris

Some may remember the reports from 2007 that, in the midst of Bear Stearns’ historic collapse, its CEO James Cayne was undeterred from finding refuge on the golf course. As the New York Times reported, mining data from Cayne’s GHIN score postings:

“On June 14, the day when Bear Stearns reported a 10 percent drop in its operating earnings for the second quarter, Mr. Cayne played a round and shot a 96… The next day, a Friday, he played again.

“On Thursday, June 21, as several big banks pressured Bear Stearns to increase the collateral on loans they had made to its sinking fund, Mr. Cayne was back on the course. That day, he shot a 98.

“The next day, in the biggest rescue of a hedge fund in almost a decade, Bear Stearns pledged to put up $3.2 billion to bail out its fund. (It later said that $1.6 billion would suffice.) Then the remarkably consistent Mr. Cayne played golf, shooting a 97.”

While golfers may understand, the public does not always get it, as evidenced by the bad press that Boston Red Sox pitcher Josh Beckett received last week. Beckett, whose contract calls for him to be paid $15.75 million this year, has been struggling this year. Earlier this month, he was pulled from a scheduled start ostensibly suffering from stiffness.

Beckett, however, gave little thought to the ailment the following day when he headed for the golf course. As with the James Cayne story, Beckett’s golf adventure did not sit well with the public at large, especially when he was clobbered in his next outing, giving up seven runs in 2 1/3 innings.

Beckett did not help matters when asked about the incident:

“Question (paraphrased): Did the golf business have any impact on how you pitched?

Answer: None. None.

Question: Anything to say about the golf business?

Answer: No. I spend my off days the way I want to spend them.

Question: Any regrets?

Answer: My off day is my off day.

Question: Given that you were skipped a start with what was described as a tight lat muscle, do people have the right to question why you were golfing?

Answer: Not on my off day.

Question: Do you understand the perception that leaves when the team is playing as poorly as it is?

Answer: We get 18 off days a year. I think we deserve a little time to ourselves.”

Anybody looking for a 4th?

By: Rob Harris

Thanks to the Fairfield and Westchester County Business Journals for their profile of Golf Dispute Resolution, which can be accessed here. We are pleased to see the business community taking an increasing interest in legal issues pertaining to the golf industry, and especially the initiative to seek their resolution through means other than litigation.

The Country Club of Scranton offers an enticing invitation to club members and their guests:

“If you’re looking for a great dining experience, the Country Club of Scranton is the place to go. Whether it’s outside on the Club’s majestic patio overlooking the golf course or in the classical Grill Room where plaques listing tournament champions from the past 50 years adorn the walls, you’ll find something to suit your culinary tastes and have it expertly served by our veteran waitstaff. From prime steaks and chops, to the very freshest fish and seafood entrees, you will have a difficult time trying to decide which great dish to order.”

According to a federal jury, it wasn’t always this way.

The former executive chef at the club, having worked his way up from line cook over a 22 year career, was fired in 2009. Believing that he was being pushed aside as the result of age discrimination, he filed suit.  The club defended by marching in board members who testified about the complaints that members made about the food.

The jury apparently agreed with the club’s view that a change in kitchen leadership was appropriate, and rejected the claim of discrimination.