Callaway Golf Seeks Additional Court Order
Against Former Vice President

Callaway Golf Ball Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Callaway Golf Company, took the unusual and aggressive step today in its lawsuit against former Vice President, Sales, Mark King, of filing a Petition for Writ of Mandate in the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division One. In the Petition, Callaway Golf Ball requests that the Appellate Court either instruct the trial court to order Mr. King immediately to stop any further work for competitor Taylor Made Adidas Golf Company or, in the alternative, expedite the resolution of Callaway Golf Ball's appeal raising the same issue.

In an order signed on September 27, 1999, the Superior Court in Vista, California, granted Callaway Golf Ball an injunction restraining Mark King "and all those acting in concert with him" from "using, disclosing, copying or transmitting any trade secrets of Callaway Golf Ball Company regarding the design, manufacture, sale and marketing of golf balls." However, the Superior Court did not grant Callaway Golf Ball's request that Mr. King be ordered to stop all further work for Taylor Made pending the outcome of Callaway Golf Ball's arbitration proceeding against Mr. King. Callaway Golf Ball initiated the arbitration proceedings in August 1999 alleging that Mr. King had violated his written employment agreement, which was to run through the end of 2000, and that Mr. King had or would violate the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. On September 29, 1999, Callaway Golf Ball filed its Notice of Appeal from that part of the Superior Court's ruling denying the request that Mr. King be prevented from working at Taylor Made. Because it can often take up to two years for an appeal to be heard, Callaway Golf Ball today filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate to seek an earlier action by the Court of Appeals.

"We are confident that our position on appeal is correct, and that we should ultimately prevail," said Steve McCracken, Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer of Callaway Golf. "However, the normal appellate process may move too slowly for us to get the relief we deserve in time for it to be meaningful. For example, our new golf balls may well be on the market before the matter could even be briefed in the Court of Appeal. For that reason, we have sought what might be considered emergency relief in the Court of Appeal to speed up the process. We recognize that such Writs are seldom granted, but we strongly feel that our case presents one of those unusual and important situations where a Writ is appropriate."

"As we announced earlier this week, we intend to establish in the appellate courts that the legal doctrine of 'inevitable disclosure' - which is recognized in many jurisdictions outside California - is the law in this state as well," Mr. McCracken continued. "Mr. King has extensive knowledge about our business, and is in a position where he will now be directing a significant competitor's business in immediate and direct competition with us. We recognize and appreciate the fact that the Superior Court has ordered Mr. King not to disclose or use our trade secrets in his new job. However, unless he has the unheard of ability to compartmentalize his brain or self-induce selective memory loss, we do not understand how he can perform his new duties without inevitably using the information he learned from us. That is why we think the courts should take the next step and require that Mr. King not work for our competition."