Eagles Lodge Hit With $11M Verdict For Patron Who Caused Crash

, Daily Business Review


A jury returned an $11.1 million verdict against an Eagles Lodge saying it served too much alcohol to a patron who drove off and collided with a motorcyclist.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • C. David Durkee, Esq.


    This is the headline I was referring to:

    • Although He Drank Too Much, Jury Says He‘s Not At Fault For Drunken-Driving Accident

  • C. David Durkee, Esq.

    I think the headline is very misleading. The jury found that the driver who drank too much was negligent and caused damage to the plaintiff. However, the jury also found that the bar was responsible for that negligent act based on their own negligent conduct. Your article correctly points out that the drunk driver was NOT placed on the verdict form due to the "derivative" nature of the claim. Therefore, the bar is being held responsible for the drunk driver‘s negligent act. You headline makes it seem like the jury exhonerated the drunk drive and instead placed blame on the bar - that is a misreading of this case. The headline should have read Bar held responsible for serving a known alcoholic to the point he was visibly drunk. Justice was served in this case. Your headline makes it sound like somehow the Plaintiff attorney tricked them and made the bar responsible instead of the drunk driver. Actually, the bar and the drunk driver were both responsible. So society is protected from both acts of negligence.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202656585597

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.