This seems kind of crazy considering the victim chose to ride in a vehicle with an intoxicated driver. It’s not like the victim was driving a different vehicle and had no idea that the other driver was intoxicated. If the bar should have known the lady was intoxicated, then the victim should have known too, right?
The victim was probably intoxicated too. No law against being intoxicated. The bar holds the duty to know the served is intoxicated; NOT the victim. Was the victim serving the driver??? How did this comment get 22 thumbs up???
I agree that some suits are misdirected. This is not one of those.
Coupled with the fact the driver was going 100 miles an hour. I’m thinking grandpa needs to go after the insured’s money instead. Oh, wait: she won’t have near the money the VFW organization has; silly me.
It will be interesting to see how this turns out. In Montana, the standard is “visibly intoxicated” and recovery is limited to $250k noneconomic damages and $250k punitive.
Being a proud member of my local VFW, I know that most (yes most) customers are regularly overserved. Employees do not receive proper training and drinks are cheap and strong.
With that said, I agree the deceased had to have known the driver was intoxicated when she chose to get in the car with her. But you hardly make good choices while under the influence.
I googled this story and found out the attorney is also suing the drivers mother, as she lent the car to her allegedly knowing she was going to drive drunk. And Montana has the highest number of drunk driving fatalities in the country.
It’s ironic that the drunk’s name is Brandy.
This seems kind of crazy considering the victim chose to ride in a vehicle with an intoxicated driver. It’s not like the victim was driving a different vehicle and had no idea that the other driver was intoxicated. If the bar should have known the lady was intoxicated, then the victim should have known too, right?
The victim was probably intoxicated too. No law against being intoxicated. The bar holds the duty to know the served is intoxicated; NOT the victim. Was the victim serving the driver??? How did this comment get 22 thumbs up???
I agree that some suits are misdirected. This is not one of those.
Coupled with the fact the driver was going 100 miles an hour. I’m thinking grandpa needs to go after the insured’s money instead. Oh, wait: she won’t have near the money the VFW organization has; silly me.
It will be interesting to see how this turns out. In Montana, the standard is “visibly intoxicated” and recovery is limited to $250k noneconomic damages and $250k punitive.
Being a proud member of my local VFW, I know that most (yes most) customers are regularly overserved. Employees do not receive proper training and drinks are cheap and strong.
With that said, I agree the deceased had to have known the driver was intoxicated when she chose to get in the car with her. But you hardly make good choices while under the influence.
I googled this story and found out the attorney is also suing the drivers mother, as she lent the car to her allegedly knowing she was going to drive drunk. And Montana has the highest number of drunk driving fatalities in the country.
Hey, I lived in Montana and what else is there to do nine months out of the year?