Linda Chen is suing the organizers of a charity golf match close to Orlando, Florida, after she was denied a prize she believed she had earned by sinking a hole-in-one. The prize was a Mercedes E-Class price an estimated $90,000.

Chen entered the charity match, which happened on the Isleworth Golf & Nation Membership, in Might. Her spherical was going wonderful, till the eleventh gap par 3, the place she hit a lovely tee shot, which landed within the gap. By her understanding, she had achieved every thing she wanted to win the E-Class listed as a prize by the match’s organizers.

Nevertheless, when she went to gather her prize after the spherical, she discovered that Timothy Galvin, the proprietor of Match Golf Occasion, the corporate that was serving to to arrange the competitors, was uncertain if she may take it.

Learn: Professional Golfer Tae-Hoon Kim Wins Third New Genesis Automotive In 4 Months After Hitting A Gap In One

At query was Chen’s {golfing} background. Though she is now formally listed as an novice, Fox reviews that between 1994 and 1996, she was a professional golfer, one thing that Galvin claims she had not disclosed earlier than coming into the match. Actually, he claims that she signed an affidavit saying that she had by no means golfed professionally.

“There have been different skilled golfers within the occasion who knowledgeable the match of their standing,” stated Galvin. “That’s all Ms. Chen needed to do forward of time and this might have prevented how issues are going.”

In her grievance, Chen argues that she has been listed as an novice by the U.S. Golf Affiliation for greater than 15 years. She is subsequently searching for both her Mercedes E-Class or the automobile’s worth of $90,000 from the defendants listed in her go well with, amongst them Match Golf Occasion, ACE Gap In One, and Mercedes of South Orlando, which marketed the prize.

Galvin claims that he and ACE Gap In One have handed out prizes to a number of eligible individuals up to now, and that the “courtroom will reveal who’s eligible, who’s culpable, and ultimately who’s liable for the end result.”