Why would anyone feel sorry for a 19 year old ADULT that knowingly tried and was successful at getting alcohol served to him illegally and then went and wrecked his car, paralyzing himself, and then blames someone else. He is an example of ignorance that should be punished even further. And the suck wad lawyer that took his case deserves even more, for promoting the attitude he has presented to society, that he should be protected from hisself and it is our duty to do so. I am sorry for the family that has to deal with caring for him, but not sorry at all for him. Thank God he did not hurt anyone other than himself.
Not only did the court rule that this man can sue the bars that he committed a felony in, in order to purchase alcoholic beverages, it lowered the standard for recovery against the bars from willful, wanton, or reckless disregard to simple negligence. This ruling is purely based upon the fact that, while the man was a legal adult for all other actions in MA, because he was under an age urged by MADD, and mandated by the Federal government in order to obtain Federal highway funding, his majority, and thus his culpability, is non-existent.
And it gets potentially worse. The judge may not even allow a comparative negligence argument. In other words, the jury won\’t get to find fault with the plaintiff, only vote yes or no against the bars.
You\’d almost think, if you were cynical like me, that the judge wants to coerce the bars, and thus their insurers, into paying this claim. There may be policy exclusions for willful, wanton, and reckless that don\’t exist for simple negligence.
The only thing left for the judge to do now is direct a verdict.
Call me cruel but I choose to look at the bright side. The laws of natural selection have forced this idiot into his current incapacitated state (no pun intended), thereby preventing him from doing harm to others!
Uh, Gerry, the two people you mention in your email are, respectively, in the House of Representatives and the US Senate – not judges. If you want to rip along party lines, better check the stripe of the animal first.
For Get Real- Kennedy and Kerry are the two U.S. senators from Mass.
Also, Gerry, Mass. hasn\’t had a so-called liberal/progressive governor for years, plus we don\’t know background of the particular judge or who appointed and approved him.
No, its not a conservative thing, its a common sense thing for which this judge is sorely lacking, what ever party or viewpoint he represents.
this is yet another typical example of finding someone with deep pockets to grudgingly accept financial responsibility for one\’s own lack of judgement. why not sue the distiller too? this young man is a legal adult, in my opinion the legal drinking age should be 18, not 21. inherent problems like this case begs for big brother to join in, i.e. retina and fingerprint scan to assist bouncers to determine potential clientele age. high tech taverns right \’round the corner… no privacy to soon follow.
This doesn\’t surprise me at all. Since I\’ve moved to Massachusetts it has become painfully obvious in many ways that all you have to do here is blame someone else for ANYTHING that happens to you and some court or judge somewhere will agree that you should be compensated. What has happened to the people that started it all? Dumped the tea in the harbor? Take responsibility for your own actions!!
Obviously a Tavern has a responsibility to make sure the person it serves booze to is the legal age- no doubt the Tavern has some liability here. However, the liability must be limited and I believe the Jury will eventually award this \”Drunk Punk\” something-but, I doubt it will be substantial. The bottomline is, check the I.D. of your customers if they don\’t look at least in their 40\’s! An expensive lesson this Tavern owner will not forget!
Who really should be sued are his parents. For allowing their son who is under age to drink and clearly know better, to go into a bar and get liquored up.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Why would anyone feel sorry for a 19 year old ADULT that knowingly tried and was successful at getting alcohol served to him illegally and then went and wrecked his car, paralyzing himself, and then blames someone else. He is an example of ignorance that should be punished even further. And the suck wad lawyer that took his case deserves even more, for promoting the attitude he has presented to society, that he should be protected from hisself and it is our duty to do so. I am sorry for the family that has to deal with caring for him, but not sorry at all for him. Thank God he did not hurt anyone other than himself.
This case is worse than you seem to see.
Not only did the court rule that this man can sue the bars that he committed a felony in, in order to purchase alcoholic beverages, it lowered the standard for recovery against the bars from willful, wanton, or reckless disregard to simple negligence. This ruling is purely based upon the fact that, while the man was a legal adult for all other actions in MA, because he was under an age urged by MADD, and mandated by the Federal government in order to obtain Federal highway funding, his majority, and thus his culpability, is non-existent.
And it gets potentially worse. The judge may not even allow a comparative negligence argument. In other words, the jury won\’t get to find fault with the plaintiff, only vote yes or no against the bars.
You\’d almost think, if you were cynical like me, that the judge wants to coerce the bars, and thus their insurers, into paying this claim. There may be policy exclusions for willful, wanton, and reckless that don\’t exist for simple negligence.
The only thing left for the judge to do now is direct a verdict.
Call me cruel but I choose to look at the bright side. The laws of natural selection have forced this idiot into his current incapacitated state (no pun intended), thereby preventing him from doing harm to others!
Uh, Gerry, the two people you mention in your email are, respectively, in the House of Representatives and the US Senate – not judges. If you want to rip along party lines, better check the stripe of the animal first.
For Get Real- Kennedy and Kerry are the two U.S. senators from Mass.
Also, Gerry, Mass. hasn\’t had a so-called liberal/progressive governor for years, plus we don\’t know background of the particular judge or who appointed and approved him.
No, its not a conservative thing, its a common sense thing for which this judge is sorely lacking, what ever party or viewpoint he represents.
this is yet another typical example of finding someone with deep pockets to grudgingly accept financial responsibility for one\’s own lack of judgement. why not sue the distiller too? this young man is a legal adult, in my opinion the legal drinking age should be 18, not 21. inherent problems like this case begs for big brother to join in, i.e. retina and fingerprint scan to assist bouncers to determine potential clientele age. high tech taverns right \’round the corner… no privacy to soon follow.
This doesn\’t surprise me at all. Since I\’ve moved to Massachusetts it has become painfully obvious in many ways that all you have to do here is blame someone else for ANYTHING that happens to you and some court or judge somewhere will agree that you should be compensated. What has happened to the people that started it all? Dumped the tea in the harbor? Take responsibility for your own actions!!
Obviously a Tavern has a responsibility to make sure the person it serves booze to is the legal age- no doubt the Tavern has some liability here. However, the liability must be limited and I believe the Jury will eventually award this \”Drunk Punk\” something-but, I doubt it will be substantial. The bottomline is, check the I.D. of your customers if they don\’t look at least in their 40\’s! An expensive lesson this Tavern owner will not forget!
Thanks for the clarification, Risky – you\’re right, and you succinctly stated what I was trying to convey. Appreciate it.
Who really should be sued are his parents. For allowing their son who is under age to drink and clearly know better, to go into a bar and get liquored up.