“We believe that notwithstanding the instruction that the jury did not receive from the trial judge, we expect that the jury will be able with the new instruction to find that a reasonable use of the golf course was not being made by the golf course owner and the course’s unreasonable use has caused a significant amount of golf balls to strike their home, cause significant property damages, and substantial mental anguish,” said the plaintiffs’ attorney, Robert W. Galvin of Galvin & Galvin.