Taking good balls from range buckets

[pumaAttack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tefunk


And you will need to use your brain for this one, and throw out all of your made-up scenarios.

Prove to me/us it is not theft.

Ha, prove to me that the driving range isn't stealing the ball first.

Quote:

Demands any payment to which he or she is not legally entitled, as a condition of restoring the property to the owner. (Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-4-401(a).)

So when the range collects the ball and places it into their range bin, the property owner has to pay to get that ball back.  You know, a definition of theft by the State of Colorado.

[pumaAttack]

If the ball was taken out of the range basket, the prosecution already established proof. The burden "ball" would be back in the defendants court

So I can just throw anything into my trunk and claim it as mine?  That is how possession laws works to you?

[Hardspoon]

So I can just throw anything into my trunk and claim it as mine?  That is how possession laws works to you?

If someone intentionally flings it 250 yards into your property, and then leaves...yeah, kinda.

[pumaAttack]

If someone intentionally flings it 250 yards into your property, and then leaves...yeah, kinda.

Who intentionally fires a brand new ProV1 into the driving range?

Sorry but I have yet to hear anything that lays claim to the driving range being the legal owner of that golf ball.   Nobody has provided any legal precedent proving as such.

[Ernest Jones]

If the entire range bucket was full of them?  No.  I would assume those were the range balls at the course.  I have played at courses that use normal Titleists as their driving range balls... I wouldn't steal a product that the range paid for and truly owned.

Really? Not even one, for a souvenir? What if it was a resort and the balls all had the resort logo? Cool souvenir, no? You don't grab one?

[mvmac]

This sign is posted in the opening credits of Tin Cup

[RFKFREAK]

If someone intentionally flings it 250 yards into your property, and then leaves...yeah, kinda.

I thought a better example might be if a cab driver at the end of their shift found something like a dirty baseball cap under the seat in the cab.

[pumaAttack]

Really? Not even one, for a souvenir? What if it was a resort and the balls all had the resort logo? Cool souvenir, no? You don't grab one?

Nope.

I don't steal legal property of the course.  A range ball that they branded with their logo is their property.   I just don't take pretty things that catch my eye.

[Ernest Jones]

Who intentionally fires a brand new ProV1 into the driving range? Sorry but I have yet to hear anything that lays claim to the driving range being the legal owner of that golf ball.   Nobody has provided any legal precedent proving as such.

As I stated prior, both @Duff McGee and @Mr. Desmond provided what I assume is the textbook interpretation for the ownership question. That textbook interpretation is based on jurisprudence and case law.

[RFKFREAK]

As I stated prior, both @Duff McGee and @Mr. Desmond provided what I assume is the textbook interpretation for the ownership question. That textbook interpretation is based on jurisprudence and case law.

Are those the two lawyers that are referenced ITT?

[pumaAttack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ernest Jones


As I stated prior, both @Duff McGee and @Mr. Desmond provided what I assume is the textbook interpretation for the ownership question. That textbook interpretation is based on jurisprudence and case law.

Ha, just because some poster says its true doesn't mean it actually is.

I just found this legal precedent that says otherwise:

https://www.ngcoa.ca/Userfiles/File/GBC/1997/Fall/Legal%20Fall-97.pdf

Quote:

The acquittal was based on his view that the balls in question remained the property of the golfers who had hit them there, and not of the golf course where they were abandoned. So anyone taking them is not stealing from the golf course operator.

[Ernest Jones]

I just don't take pretty things that catch my eye.

Oh, my bad, I had you confused with one of the guys that said they'll grab a nice, shiny, new ball from the range bucket if it caught their eye.

[gregsandiego]

Who intentionally fires a brand new ProV1 into the driving range?

Sorry but I have yet to hear anything that lays claim to the driving range being the legal owner of that golf ball.   Nobody has provided any legal precedent proving as such.

Yeah and you are not probably going to find the court records for " Weekend Warrior vs American Golf". So there is no legal precedent. But who do you actually think owns that ball?

1. The course,

2. The golfer that lost it.

3. Nobody.

4. The guy that found it in his bucket of range balls.

And explain why.

[pumaAttack]

Oh, my bad, I had you confused with one of the guys that said they'll grab a nice, shiny, new ball from the range bucket if it caught their eye.

You mean the abandoned ball that has no owner?

Talk about a strawman, buddy.

[pumaAttack]

Yeah and you are not probably going to find the court records for " Weekend Warrior vs American Golf". So there is no legal precedent. But who do you actually think owns that ball?

1. The course,

2. The golfer that lost it.

3. Nobody.

4. The guy that found it in his bucket of range balls.

And explain why.

Read the legal precedent I just linked to.

The course does not own the balls, they have no claim to them.

The original owner of the golf ball owns it.   And I would gladly return it to them if they saw me with it.

[Ernest Jones]

Ha, just because some poster says its true doesn't mean it actually is.   I just found this legal precedent that says otherwise: [URL=https://www.ngcoa.ca/Userfiles/File/GBC/1997/Fall/Legal%20Fall-97.pdf]https://www.ngcoa.ca/Userfiles/File/GBC/1997/Fall/Legal%20Fall-97.pdf[/URL]

Well, maybe the two attorneys got it wrong. I'd be interested to hear their take. I didn't read the link so I won't comment beyond saying that if it's a legitimate source and the decision says what you thinks says, then I'm definitely interested in hearing from Duff'n'Dez.

[newtogolf]

Well, maybe the two attorneys got it wrong. I'd be interested to hear their take. I didn't read the link so I won't comment beyond saying that if it's a legitimate source and the decision says what you thinks says, then I'm definitely interested in hearing from Duff'n'Dez.

The precedent he linked is from Canada and involves kids taking balls out of a course pond, not cherry picking them out of buckets that are rented on the range.  Apple to oranges, but a nice try.

[pumaAttack]

Well, maybe the two attorneys got it wrong. I'd be interested to hear their take. I didn't read the link so I won't comment beyond saying that if it's a legitimate source and the decision says what you thinks says, then I'm definitely interested in hearing from Duff'n'Dez.

If nothing else, please just don't take what two random people say on a forum.  They do not automatically know everything because they say so.

It it is in your best interest to actual research a topic yourself.