The Grounds Of The Arena - 1442 Words

Taxpayer can also bring a claim against the owner of the arena, the City of Milwaukee, for failing to maintain the arena in a reasonably safe condition for spectators. Generally, the owner of a sports venue must use reasonable care to protect spectators from the harm that exists due to the sports event. However, extent of protection depends on the venue and the inherent risks of the sport. For example, determining if a golf course is in a reasonably safe condition includes considering its design, protections for spectators, and the manner in which the coarse is operated. In baseball it is generally accepted that owners of stadiums owe a duty to protect spectators seating behind home plate and on the baseline from foul balls. Further,†¦show more content†¦Nevertheless, it is likely that the safe place statute would be applied to it. Additionally, spectators at the game, like those at a baseball game, will likely be found as frequenters. Thus, the City of Milwaukee probab ly owed a duty to keep the arena as reasonably safe as possible under Wisconsin’s safe place statute. Under the safe place statute, Taxpayer can make several claims that the City of Milwaukee was negligent in maintaining the course. First, Taxpayer can assert that the City failed in their duty to warn spectators of the risks of an errant ball. However, the National Basketball Association (â€Å"NBA†), the largest professional basketball in the world, does not require arena owners to warn spectators of the risks for attending a basketball game, particularly those inherent with courtside seats. Unfortunately, courts have yet to address the issue of to what extent, if any, an owner of a basketball stadium has to warn spectators of potential risks. A determination of if a basketball arena’s owner duty to warn will likely require the court to look at unique circumstance of a basketball game, using the duty to warn spectators in golf, baseball, and hockey as guidance but not binding precedent. Ultimately, it is likely that a court would find that no duty to warn spectators exist because the risks of setting courtside at a basketball game, literally feet from the intense action of the game, should be