I guess the false imprisonment claim will cheaper than the wrongful death claim. Worse, if you have been drinking you won’t be able to get a cab. I think this will put more drunks on the road. How stupid!!
Was the limo driver supposed to handcuff the passenger to a lampost to make sure he did not drive? If he had handcuffed him, the drunk would have sued for false arrest.
When will the courts step up and make the individual responsible for their OWN actions?
Unbelievable is an understatement. These guys did the responsible thing by taking a limo. The irresponsible thing was being picked up at a sports bar leaving them to drive home.
So now every limo driver needs to perform a FST field sobriety test on every occupant of their vehicle on departure.
What a joke. We are legislating this country back to prohibition one bad law at a time.
Better yet… instead of taking them back to their cars, take them directly to the police station where they can be locked up. This saves serveral steps in the usual process as well as lives and dollars.
HOW COME TODAY NO ONE IS RESPOSIBLE FOR THIER OUN ACTIONS OR LACK OF JUDGEMENT, IT SEEMS THAT WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IT IS EVERYBODY ELSES FAULT OR THIER DEEP POCKETS, THIS IS REALLY OVER THE TOP
I agree with the comments so far about the state of our society and responsibility. However, the contributory negligence issue in this situation is whether or not the limo company provided them with alcohol during the ride. Most do. If so, why should limo companies be treated any differently than a bar? I’m sure in this case both bars will also be named.
The judge has a dead police officer killed by a drunk driver in his court. He must find a “duty” on someone and apply its breach to a deep pocket. “Duty, duty, duty!” Who are the characters involved in the killing? Line them up — jointly and severally, charge with the esponsiblity and obligation to have done the right thing if their minds were not impaired. The drunks hired a cab because they knew that getting drunk is a traditional ritual for the batchelor party, e.g., seeing naked females, having a blast but knew that the only way to do it was to become inibriated. Part-and-Parcel Tradition! Why did they hire the cab? Ans: Foreseeability. They knew they could not drive in a drunken stupor. The only clear head was that of the cabbie. Hah, within the chained-characters duty attaches right here. The dead police officer’s family may just be compensated because of the lack of clear thinking by the deep pocket cabbie. The grieving parties will no be wards of the state. Future Impact: Muslim cab drivers will be the only ones hired to drive the public around. They abhor drunks and have been known to kick them off their cabs. Lawsuits for discrimation and against public policy reasons should abound. Insurance premiums will escalate; but, competition should be very good for those companies that would not suffer such bottomline losses. Free enterprise will find the right risk management concept, pricing, and techniques. Like sitting on the middle of a water-bed.
Though I’m not sure what “sitting on the middle of a water-bed” has to do with any of this, but I do see both sides of this lawsuit. It is certainly unpractical of not impossible for a livery company to extend care for their passengers beyond the scope of the actual transportation. But if the livery company provides alcohol then I would assume the same contributory liability laws similar to any alcohol vender would likewise apply.
Let’s see… The bachelor-party goers (I counted about 6 of them) were smart enough to hire a cab to drive from the bar to the strip club, and back again (it is not stated whether he sat with his meter running, or if he was called back to pick them up). He drops them off at the bar, and is expected to know whether: 1) they are going back into the bar; or; 2) they have a designated driver; or 3) each will call individual cabs to transport each of them home? It appears that 2-3 of them may have been able to drive home safely and perhaps the cabbie did not know who was too drunk to drive.
After reading the article, the posted comments, and the article again it is hard to judge the van driver did any wrong doing. It does not say he provided the drinks while they were in the van, It does not say that he did not tell them not to drive. But it did say that the lower court threw the case out of court in favor of the van company and driver.
What if the van driver dropped him off at his home? He still could have gotten in a car and did something similar. I have to agree with some of the comments that they are looking for the deep pockets. If they are looking at responsibility then they should be looking at the sports bar. Especially, if they served them any more drinks when the returned after the visiting the Rhode Island establishment.
I am now waiting to hear that they have brought the tire comapny that supplied the tires for the van to be brought into the suit.
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.
I guess the false imprisonment claim will cheaper than the wrongful death claim. Worse, if you have been drinking you won’t be able to get a cab. I think this will put more drunks on the road. How stupid!!
Was the limo driver supposed to handcuff the passenger to a lampost to make sure he did not drive? If he had handcuffed him, the drunk would have sued for false arrest.
When will the courts step up and make the individual responsible for their OWN actions?
This is a SICK and UNJUST judgement.
Unbelievable is an understatement. These guys did the responsible thing by taking a limo. The irresponsible thing was being picked up at a sports bar leaving them to drive home.
So now every limo driver needs to perform a FST field sobriety test on every occupant of their vehicle on departure.
What a joke. We are legislating this country back to prohibition one bad law at a time.
Thank you MADD. A job well done.
Better yet… instead of taking them back to their cars, take them directly to the police station where they can be locked up. This saves serveral steps in the usual process as well as lives and dollars.
HOW COME TODAY NO ONE IS RESPOSIBLE FOR THIER OUN ACTIONS OR LACK OF JUDGEMENT, IT SEEMS THAT WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IT IS EVERYBODY ELSES FAULT OR THIER DEEP POCKETS, THIS IS REALLY OVER THE TOP
I agree with the comments so far about the state of our society and responsibility. However, the contributory negligence issue in this situation is whether or not the limo company provided them with alcohol during the ride. Most do. If so, why should limo companies be treated any differently than a bar? I’m sure in this case both bars will also be named.
The judge has a dead police officer killed by a drunk driver in his court. He must find a “duty” on someone and apply its breach to a deep pocket. “Duty, duty, duty!” Who are the characters involved in the killing? Line them up — jointly and severally, charge with the esponsiblity and obligation to have done the right thing if their minds were not impaired. The drunks hired a cab because they knew that getting drunk is a traditional ritual for the batchelor party, e.g., seeing naked females, having a blast but knew that the only way to do it was to become inibriated. Part-and-Parcel Tradition! Why did they hire the cab? Ans: Foreseeability. They knew they could not drive in a drunken stupor. The only clear head was that of the cabbie. Hah, within the chained-characters duty attaches right here. The dead police officer’s family may just be compensated because of the lack of clear thinking by the deep pocket cabbie. The grieving parties will no be wards of the state. Future Impact: Muslim cab drivers will be the only ones hired to drive the public around. They abhor drunks and have been known to kick them off their cabs. Lawsuits for discrimation and against public policy reasons should abound. Insurance premiums will escalate; but, competition should be very good for those companies that would not suffer such bottomline losses. Free enterprise will find the right risk management concept, pricing, and techniques. Like sitting on the middle of a water-bed.
Though I’m not sure what “sitting on the middle of a water-bed” has to do with any of this, but I do see both sides of this lawsuit. It is certainly unpractical of not impossible for a livery company to extend care for their passengers beyond the scope of the actual transportation. But if the livery company provides alcohol then I would assume the same contributory liability laws similar to any alcohol vender would likewise apply.
Am I wrong on this?
Let’s see… The bachelor-party goers (I counted about 6 of them) were smart enough to hire a cab to drive from the bar to the strip club, and back again (it is not stated whether he sat with his meter running, or if he was called back to pick them up). He drops them off at the bar, and is expected to know whether: 1) they are going back into the bar; or; 2) they have a designated driver; or 3) each will call individual cabs to transport each of them home? It appears that 2-3 of them may have been able to drive home safely and perhaps the cabbie did not know who was too drunk to drive.
After reading the article, the posted comments, and the article again it is hard to judge the van driver did any wrong doing. It does not say he provided the drinks while they were in the van, It does not say that he did not tell them not to drive. But it did say that the lower court threw the case out of court in favor of the van company and driver.
What if the van driver dropped him off at his home? He still could have gotten in a car and did something similar. I have to agree with some of the comments that they are looking for the deep pockets. If they are looking at responsibility then they should be looking at the sports bar. Especially, if they served them any more drinks when the returned after the visiting the Rhode Island establishment.
I am now waiting to hear that they have brought the tire comapny that supplied the tires for the van to be brought into the suit.