ChopSuey Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 Self-Described Drunk Sues Florida BarBOYNTON BEACH, Fla. -- A man whose lawsuit describes himself as a habitual drunk is suing a Boynton Beach bar that served him before he was charged with drunken driving. Twenty-seven-year-old Brian Licitra claims the Banana Boat Restaurant and Lounge was negligent for serving him when the staff knew he was a drunkard. Licitra injured himself and restaurant employees in a crash last June. His lawyer says Licitra had been fired by the Banana Boat for his drinking problem. Source: Local6.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbluepride35 Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 Does NO ONE take responsibility for their own problems anymore?! This is so dumb. Just another @$$ trying to make a buck. How about you worry about rehabbing yourself instead of balming others for your issues? I'm sure you were forced to drink by the employees and couldn't make your own choice to say, here's a crazy thought, . . . NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fighter-X Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 I cant believe lawyers defend stupid cases. Its all for the money... :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Lyle Global Moderator Posted April 22, 2005 Global Moderator Share Posted April 22, 2005 Does NO ONE take responsibility for their own problems anymore?! This is so dumb. Just another @$$ trying to make a buck. How about you worry about rehabbing yourself instead of balming others for your issues? I'm sure you were forced to drink by the employees and couldn't make your own choice to say, here's a crazy thought, . . . NO. 585782347[/snapback] agreed. ive said it tuns of times on here... people just wanna be pampered by a lawyer. 15 years ago, laywers woulda laughed in your face and told you to take a hike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted April 22, 2005 Veteran Share Posted April 22, 2005 These are the stupid lawsuits that slow down the courts from getting to the most important cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted April 28, 2005 Veteran Share Posted April 28, 2005 There are precidents. Victims of drunk drivers have sued bars who served patrons to the point of intoxication. In Canada, bars, restaurants and even home owners throwing a party can be held partially responsible for the actions of drunk drivers. I took a server training course a few years ago where we were expected to be able to estimate blood alcohol content of the patrons. I used to run a student pub at U of T and that was a required course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonax Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 It's lawsuits like these which make me fear the future of society :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoundToEarth Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 It's lawsuits like these which make me fear the future of society :( 585842239[/snapback] Yea.. :blush: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdb815 Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 Gawd will it ever end? :| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudworth Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 There are precidents. Victims of drunk drivers have sued bars who served patrons to the point of intoxication. yeah, and IMHO its retarded that the legal system sets precidents in such a manner, if you work in a bar as a server, you shouldnt have to babysit some sad excuse for an upright primate just because they dont know when to quit, or be held liable for their stupidity after the fact. makes just asmuch sense as a burglar being able to sue someone for injuring themselves whilst performing a break-and enter on that persons place of residence, OR BETTER YET, someone suing McDonalds over coffee being too hot because they were driving with their coffee between their legs and spilled it on themselves, the legal system seems to have no purpose other than to defend people who through natural process, would otherwise be removed from fouling-up the gene-pool..... I dont recall who said it, but I read a quote to the effect of "I am ashamed that the law is such an ass" once, and it rings true over and over and over..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eli Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 So if I go into the LCBO (liquor control board of Ontario....where we get our liquor....) completely hammered, then buy a 40 of vodka, and run face first into a brick wall and cut up my face, I can sue to LCBO? Oh wait...no I can't....I'm in Canada. We don't do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psybapunk Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 nuke em all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doli Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 yeah, and IMHO its retarded that the legal system sets precidents in such a manner, if you work in a bar as a server, you shouldnt have to babysit some sad excuse for an upright primate just because they dont know when to quit, or be held liable for their stupidity after the fact. makes just asmuch sense as a burglar being able to sue someone for injuring themselves whilst performing a break-and enter on that persons place of residence, OR BETTER YET, someone suing McDonalds over coffee being too hot because they were driving with their coffee between their legs and spilled it on themselves, the legal system seems to have no purpose other than to defend people who through natural process, would otherwise be removed from fouling-up the gene-pool..... I dont recall who said it, but I read a quote to the effect of "I am ashamed that the law is such an ass" once, and it rings true over and over and over..... 585843459[/snapback] I think servers should refuse service to some people also if they think they are too drunk, if they can help prevent something from happining, but they shouldnt be sued also that person should take responsibility for his actions. Hell i try to take his keys, just thinking about what can happen is scary, he could hit and kill someone and i hate for that someone to be anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leesmithg Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 Does NO ONE take responsibility for their own problems anymore?! This is so dumb. Just another @$$ trying to make a buck. How about you worry about rehabbing yourself instead of balming others for your issues? I'm sure you were forced to drink by the employees and couldn't make your own choice to say, here's a crazy thought, . . . NO. 585782347[/snapback] It's the same crap in the U.K., Yogurt Knitting liberals trying to palm the blame off on someone else. You can be sued for your Dog biting a burgular on your property, you can be sued for beating the f&8k out of a burgular stealing from your house, a Woman of 20 is currently suing a Hospital for asking for an abortion, they gave her an injection the remains came out, she found out later she was pregnant with the other twin, had one now wants the Hospital to give her ?250,000 to support the child till it's 18, there are thousands of cases like this and the ones mentioned. It's called the 'BLAME CULTURE' people intent of gaining money for greedyness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadrack Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 so he is basically a 27-year-old child. Just another one, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theyarecomingforyou Posted April 28, 2005 Share Posted April 28, 2005 I think servers should refuse service to some people also if they think they are too drunk, if they can help prevent something from happining, but they shouldnt be sued also that person should take responsibility for his actions. 585843697[/snapback] Exactly. The point is that the person(s) that served him should be disciplined and fined (if appropriate) for their actions but the drunk driver should not be able to profit from it (otherwise you will encourage immoral behaviour). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted April 29, 2005 Veteran Share Posted April 29, 2005 yeah, and IMHO its retarded that the legal system sets precidents in such a manner, if you work in a bar as a server, you shouldnt have to babysit some sad excuse for an upright primate just because they dont know when to quit, or be held liable for their stupidity after the fact. 585843459[/snapback] I think that, as a provider of alcohol, you should. It is irresponsible to place profit (a few additional drink sales) over the potential lives of innocent victims that could be killed by that drunk driver. As far as I am concerned, it is a problem that the liquor establishment helped to create. In this particular case, I think this drunk driver lost his right to compensation once he chose to break the law. Had there been innocent victims though, then they should have the right to legal action against the bar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzachattack2 Posted May 1, 2005 Share Posted May 1, 2005 Exactly.The point is that the person(s) that served him should be disciplined and fined (if appropriate) for their actions but the drunk driver should not be able to profit from it (otherwise you will encourage immoral behaviour). 585843748[/snapback] The server is doing his job. The distinction between who should be served alcohol and not be served is not something that can be (fairly) done. Bar tenders might as well not serve anybody, because anybody can get drunk and go drive and do something very stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzachattack2 Posted May 1, 2005 Share Posted May 1, 2005 I think that, as a provider of alcohol, you should. It is irresponsible to place profit (a few additional drink sales) over the potential lives of innocent victims that could be killed by that drunk driver. As far as I am concerned, it is a problem that the liquor establishment helped to create.In this particular case, I think this drunk driver lost his right to compensation once he chose to break the law. Had there been innocent victims though, then they should have the right to legal action against the bar. 585846949[/snapback] How though is the bar tender supposed to know what levels of intoxication each and every person can handle. I understand this case is different because they know the person, but in general, determining who gets what is close to impossible. I think the bar should in no way be held liable. It's comparable to a gun store legally selling a person a gun, they going out and killing a bunch of people, and the buyer turning around and sueing the gun store owner for selling him the gun. Is the owner supposed to know that the buyer is going to do something very stupid? No. Just as in the relevant case, a bar tender has no way of knowing if the customer is going to do something very stupid, such as drink and drive. I'm not sure about the rest of you, but I still believe in personal responsibility. If I decided to get drunk and run down a few people, I'm responsible for doing something completely idiotic. Unfortunately our legal system still allows people to play the blame game and do whatever they can to cover their own arses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny1810 Posted May 1, 2005 Share Posted May 1, 2005 well in this country it is illegal to be drunk on licensed premises so if it were to happen here, then the bar/barstaff are partially at fault. I dont think the guy should have right to sue though. any potential victims should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted May 2, 2005 Veteran Share Posted May 2, 2005 How though is the bar tender supposed to know what levels of intoxication each and every person can handle. I understand this case is different because they know the person, but in general, determining who gets what is close to impossible. 585857031[/snapback] In Ontario, if not all of Canada, bar staff is expected to be able to know or at least approximate the alcoholic consumption and thus the approximate blood/alcohol percentage of each and every customer. Training to that effect is required for at least the management level (perhaps for all staff that serves alcohol). http://www.smartserve.org/training.asp Likewise, if a gun dealer would sell a weapon to someone who does not appear sober or stable then they too could be help partially responsible for what they do. The profit motive cannot be greater than the responsiblity we have to society. We cannot abdicate responsiblity only to the last person in the chain of events that led to the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts