## Facts

- Grand Canyon Bass Busters (GCBB), affiliated with the Arizona B.A.S.S. Federation, sponsored a bass fishing tournament at Bartlett Lake, a public lake some members viewed as congested with boat and jet-ski traffic.
- GCBB obtained a U.S. Forest Service permit signed by tournament director Richard Diaz requiring the permittee to assure participants operated boats safely without endangering others on or around the lake.
- Participants could fish the entire lake but were required to return to a single weigh-in station near the main launch area by 1:00 p.m. to avoid penalties or disqualification.
- GCBB did not patrol or otherwise supervise participant conduct during the tournament and did not provide safety instructions or require boating safety training, relying on participants to police themselves.
- Around 12:55 p.m., participant James Kirkland operated his bass boat at roughly 40 mph toward the weigh-in station with several miles remaining before the deadline.
- Kirkland’s boat collided with a jet ski operated by Heather Rudolph (a nonparticipant) and a friend; both died at the scene.
- Heather’s parents sued the Federation, GCBB, Diaz, and others for negligence based on the choice of location, the single weigh-in site, the fixed deadline structure, and lack of supervision and safety measures.

## Issues

1. Whether tournament sponsors and organizers owed a duty of reasonable care to a nonparticipant using the same public lake when injured by a tournament participant.
2. Whether the absence of a “special relationship” or direct control over the participant’s conduct eliminated any duty as a matter of law.
3. Whether accepting a permit requiring assurance of safe participant boat operation supported recognition of a duty to other lake users.

## Decision

- The Arizona Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment for the Federation, GCBB, and Diaz and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court held defendants owed a duty of reasonable care to Heather as a foreseeable user of the public lake affected by defendants’ tournament activities.
- The court rejected the trial court’s conclusion that duty required a special relationship with Heather or direct control over Kirkland.
- With duty established, breach, causation, and comparative fault were questions for the fact-finder and not resolvable on summary judgment.

## Legal Principles

- The existence of a legal duty is a question of law for the court.
- Organizers who use a public facility for an event owe other users a duty of reasonable care when the event’s design and operation may foreseeably create risks to those users.
- Duty in negligence is not limited to categorical “special relationship” situations; it may arise from ordinary obligations between co-users of public spaces.
- A duty may also arise or be reinforced where a defendant undertakes safety responsibilities by agreement, including accepting permit conditions requiring assurance of safe participant conduct.
- Once duty is found, whether conduct fell below the standard of care and whether it caused the injury are generally fact questions unsuitable for summary judgment on a duty-only rationale.

## Conclusion

The court held that fishing tournament sponsors and organizers could owe reasonable care to nonparticipants on a public lake where the tournament’s structure and safety undertakings foreseeably affected other users, requiring reversal of summary judgment and leaving breach and causation for trial.


Rudolph v. Ariz. B.A.S.S. Fed'n, 182 Ariz. 622, 898 P.2d 1000 (Ct. App. 1995)