1. If Zeidman had signaled to his partners that all was clear from the fairway and was then hit while returning in the cart, would Fisher be entitled to a summary judgment based on assumption of the risk?
2. What duty did Fisher owe Zeidman in the first place? Was it a special relationship duty?

Zeidman and Fisher were participating in golf foursome and one hole, where the fairway was partially blocked, Zeidman agreed to take the golf cart and ride ahead to see if the course was clear for the group to hit. Zeidman made his observations and was returning to his foursome to report that the course was clear when Fisher hit his shot anyway. Fisher’s shot was errant and the ball struck Zeidman in the face causing serious and permanent injuries. Zeidman sued Fisher for negligence and the trial court dismissed his claim ruling that Zeidman had assumed the risk.