In Thurman v. Ice Palace (1939) 36 Cal. App. 2d 364, the court reversed a directed verdict for the defendant ice rink, concluding the plaintiff spectator was entitled to a trial on whether the defendant had negligently failed to provide warnings or screens to protect against flying pucks. The Court stated: "It is not common knowledge that pucks used in ice hockey games are liable to be batted into the section occupied by the spectators. Indeed, the puck is ordinarily batted along the surface of the ice, but in a baseball game the ball is ordinarily batted into the air rather than along the surface of the playing field." ( Thurman, 36 Cal. App. 2d 364 at 368.)