Skip to main content

This Day in Legal History -- PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 61 (2001)

By


On this date in legal history in 2001 the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin. While not a landmark case, it is interesting because few sports-related cases reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

Martin was Casey Martin a professional golfer who suffers from Klippel Trenaunay Syndrome. This genetic defect causes abnormal growth of blood cells or the lymphatic system and causes pain and makes it difficult to walk, especially the distances involved in 18 holes of golf. Martin had played college golf at Stanford, where he had been a teammate of Tiger Woods, and wished to play professionally on the PGA tour and wanted to be allowed to ride in a golf cart between holes due to his medical condition. 

The PGA denied Martin’s request and asserted that walking between holes was an integral part of the game and riding in a cart would provide Martin with an unfair advantage. Martin sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act. 

The court ruled 7-2 in favor of Martin. Perhaps the most notable result of the case was the finding that walking was not fundamental to golf, thus making a lie out of Mark Twain’s statement about golf being “a good walk spoiled.”  Scalia punctuates his (typically) angry dissent with a quote from Kurt Vonnegut about “everybody was finally equal.” 

Although Casey Martin went all the way to the Supreme Court and won, he has not been as fortunate in his professional golfing career which has been spotty at best. He is currently the head coach of the University of Oregon golf team, and although he qualified for the 2012 U.S. Open, he failed to make the cut.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

By
Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le
1 comment
Read more

C-SPAN Video Archive Now Online

By
Legislative researchers and politics fans take note. C-SPAN recently completed a digitization project placing the entirety of its video collection online. The archives record all three C-SPAN networks seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The videos are available at no cost for historical, educational, research, and archival uses. The database includes over 160,000 hours of video recorded since 1987 and the programs are indexed by subject, speaker names, titles, affiliations, sponsors, committees, categories, formats, policy groups, keywords, and locations. The most recent, most watched, and most shared videos are highlighted on the main page. To start watching, visit the C-SPAN Video Library and use the search function at the top of the page.
Post a Comment
Read more

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

By
This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requires
Post a Comment
Read more