any idea why this is newsworthy? It is bad enough that a bar-owner can be responsible for a patron’s activity hours after they leave the establishment. Now are they going to have to monitor all the parkinglot activities for blocks around?
Yes they actually are liable for anything that goes on in their parking lot. I used to work at a bar and we had security comb the streets until hours after we closed to make sure that the patrons and the community are safe and secure. The restaurant and bar is also liable if the patron gets in the car and drives down the street wrecks and kills someone. Especially if they were drinking at the establishment. It sucks but that’s reality. Well at least in some parts of the nation. (CA) If the location was properly secured and monitored this would have never happened. Also the police are a quick phone call away. Now they are stuck with this claim on their policy.
The article doesn’t say he was found in the bar’s parking lot, it just says a nearby parking lot. This whole situation is ridiculous, and if the bar ends up being liable it really shows how screwed up our legal system is. People need to take responsibility for their own stupid actions
I guess they are making the case for a lawsuit for the family of the guy that died. …”he was acting belligerently”… .They will later say that it was obvious that something was wrong that someone should have called an ambulance or something. If they find that he had some kind of brain injury, watch out. Why else would it even be in the Ins. Journal? Possible lawsuit. Hope they have the right kind of insurance coverage.
Actually this is good that it was reported, then when a customer complains about me trying to sell higher limits, I can tell them stories like this one. E
ven though I don’t think the bar is responsible, if they are sued, they want to have a good defense and limits to pay a claim if the bar is found to have the liability.
That never happens on TV or in the movies. Usually they get up and walk away.
How far did he get tossed?
This article says nothing about a lawsuit or even implies a suit is in the works. Just that he was thrown out twice and found dead later. Period.
Read between the lines. I’ll be you $50 there is a lawsuit within a year.
Perhaps, but saying it now, to a client, is not truthful. There are plenty of other instances out there that have already resulted in lawsuits. You don’t need to make one up.
I’m sorry…but this sounds like the “news” that’s printed in a small town local paper. How does this belong in the Insurance Journal???
This very much belongs in the Insurance Journal. Maybe I look at this from a producer point of view that this is a good story to show to my clients that question the types of claims that can come up. So many times a customer/client will say… Oh that could never happen…. Being dragged into a claim for an incident that happens in the parking lot is very much a possibility. It helps to save the article in my files to show the client that these type of things happen. I am not saying the bar owner should be held responsible, but only that they need the protection of the defense and the limits IF found responsible
You would be misleading your client in this case. There is no mention of a suit in the article.
Libby — understand what you are saying — but if this were your customer (assuming that you are an agent), would you like to be able to say to them that “let’s report this incident so we can start possible protection for you” or would you prefer that we just say “sucks to be you”.
Of course I would recommend reporting the incident. My point was that to use this as an example of what can happen is wrong, because nothing has yet and there are plenty of real cases that could be used instead. Sometimes people jump to conclusions on IJ after skimming an article. That’s all.
Plainntiff bar will alledge, prior knowledge of p-lot fights, improper security/lighting,..dram shop..yaddy…yaddy
I agree with “hmmmmm”. This is a noteworthy topic to discuss with your insureds. The question is not “IS the bar liable”. The question is whether or not this is a valid potentional claim scenario to bring up to your bar/restaurant/nightclub client.
IF the family of the deceased allege he was over-served, then there are obvious liability issues. Of course, Dram Shop/liquor liability laws differ in each state. The burden of proving negligence can vary greatly. The point to take away here… No matter if the establishment did every thing correctly, they still need Liquor Liability coverage in place to defend them.
Secondly, I’ve seen many claims come from bouncers or bar employees “throwing” belligerent patrons out. One in particular that comes to mind is a situation where 2 patrons were harassing another patron at a har. The argument escalated. The lone patron being bullied by the other two patrons complained to the bouncers. Since the establishments policy was to throw out all parties involved in altercations or arguments in the bar, all three were told to leave. The two aggressors chased the other patron down the street. The patron being pursued ran out in front of a car and was killed. The bar was found to be negligent and the carrier had to pay a hefty claim.
This is another example of why the bar owner needs adequate coverage. They need to understand their exposure to these types of allegations-no matter how ridiculous or unfair it may be.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Notify me of comments via e-mail