Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SC woman sues bar for not checking her ID
Myrtle Beach Online ^ | Dec. 27, 2011 | The Associated Press

Posted on 12/29/2011 3:58:19 PM PST by NJRighty

BLUFFTON, S.C. -- A woman is suing a Bluffton bar because a bartender didn't check her age before serving her on the night of the 2009 wreck that paralyzed her.

The Beaufort Gazette reports that Chelsea Hess, who was then 20 years old, is a paraplegic because of the accident.

Hess' lawsuit in 14th Circuit Court says she was served at Jock's Sports Grill, but the bartender failed to check her ID or to determine if she was already drunk.

(Excerpt) Read more at thesunnews.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS: drunk; southcarolina
It's everyone else's fault except hers, I guess.
1 posted on 12/29/2011 3:58:28 PM PST by NJRighty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Tort reform (loser pays) is overdue. With the possibility this bimbo would have to pay her lawyer and the defendents lawyer, she’d never bring this stupid case.

The fact a court would hear it is equally as stupid.

On the flip side, if she wasn’t served I bet she’d sue for that.


2 posted on 12/29/2011 4:01:46 PM PST by Fledermaus (It's now clear the GOP establishment is uncapable of governing and should resign.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Hmm, only in the 21st century can you blame everyone but yourself. Who ever thought it was possible to go both forward and back as the years go on?


3 posted on 12/29/2011 4:01:58 PM PST by RWB Patriot ("My ability is a value that must be purchased and I don't recognize anyone's need as a claim on me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

That site is ridiculous. Won’t let you even read the headlines without registering?! lol.

http://www.abcnews4.com/story/16396906/sc-woman-sues-bar-for-not-checking-her-id

Hess’ lawsuit in 14th Circuit Court says she was served at Jock’s Sports Grill, but the bartender failed to check her ID or to determine if she was already drunk.

She’s also suing the state Department of Transportation, saying the agency failed to properly maintain the shoulder of the road where her car crashed.

Both the company that owns the bar and the DOT denied Hess’ claims in court papers.

Lawyers for both say Hess is responsible for her accident.


4 posted on 12/29/2011 4:02:32 PM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

This is where ‘loser pays’ would be useful. The bartender is going to bankrupt himself hiring a lawyer, no doubt.


5 posted on 12/29/2011 4:02:56 PM PST by Twotone (Marte Et Clypeo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Maybe she could sue herself for “wrongful existence”.


6 posted on 12/29/2011 4:06:22 PM PST by Free in Texas (Member of the Bitter Clingers Association.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

She is probably a democrat and has no problem with not asking for voter id.

Yet the rest of the country is paralyzed as a result of the last car accident voted in.

Hasn’t she heard? Id’s are ‘out’.


7 posted on 12/29/2011 4:07:36 PM PST by Beowulf9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

sue her for wasting our tax dollars


8 posted on 12/29/2011 4:07:52 PM PST by skaterboy (Hate=Love....Love=Hate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

sue her for wasting our tax dollars


9 posted on 12/29/2011 4:07:55 PM PST by skaterboy (Hate=Love....Love=Hate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Bartender can simply say that as an adult she knowingly violated the law and placed his establishment in legal jeapordy and he is suing her.


10 posted on 12/29/2011 4:09:53 PM PST by CodeToad (Islam needs to be banned in the US and treated as a criminal enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
The bartender is going to bankrupt himself hiring a lawyer, no doubt.

No he's not. He has liability insurance. If he didn't, the lawyer wouldn't be wasting his time. The insurance company will either settle or fight an expensive trial. Either way those costs will figure into the larger liquor liability ratings schedule nationwide. That means higher insurance rates for bars that people who drink responsibly will all end up paying.

11 posted on 12/29/2011 4:10:01 PM PST by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus

In this country, I can see “loser pays” working against you. If you rightfully sue Rich and Powerful Guy, and it’s his team of Johnny Cochrans against your one Podunk lawyer, you might lose, even if you’re in the right. It’s a big risk.


12 posted on 12/29/2011 4:10:30 PM PST by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
The bartender is going to bankrupt himself hiring a lawyer, no doubt.

No he's not. He has liability insurance. If he didn't, the lawyer wouldn't be wasting his time. The insurance company will either settle or fight an expensive trial. Either way those costs will figure into the larger liquor liability ratings schedule nationwide. That means higher insurance rates for bars that people who drink responsibly will all end up paying.

13 posted on 12/29/2011 4:10:33 PM PST by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

If she was so wasted she crashed, how can she know for sure he didn’t ask and she didn’t have a fake id.


14 posted on 12/29/2011 4:10:47 PM PST by formosa (Formosa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beowulf9
Haven't you heard?

voter fraud is a myth.


15 posted on 12/29/2011 4:11:19 PM PST by OddLane (If Lionel Hutz and Guy Smiley had a lovechild together, his name would be "Mitt Romney." -KAJ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

The question that this asks is where is the responsibility lye. The answer is obvious with her, thus the suit should be mute. I am not for the law / legal drinking age, but considering it does exist then if anyone can sue it would be the state. The suit/penelity would not be for the individual (her) but rather the failure to abide by the law which at most should result in a fine. The medical penalty lays in the hands of the responsible party (her).


16 posted on 12/29/2011 4:13:32 PM PST by jafojeffsurf (Return to the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

Exactly. It’s not really “She’s suing the bar”, it’s “Her lawyer is suing the bar’s insurance company”. Which is why a bottle of beer in a bar costs five bucks, or whatever they charge these days. Haven’t seen the inside of a bar in a long time, and the risk of DUI is the prime reason. Ain’t worth it.


17 posted on 12/29/2011 4:14:15 PM PST by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

The question that this asks is where is the responsibility lye. The answer is obvious with her, thus the suit should be mute. I am not for the law / legal drinking age, but considering it does exist then if anyone can sue it would be the state. The suit/penalty would not be for the individual (her), but rather the failure to abide by the law which at most should result in a fine. The medical penalty lays in the hands of the responsible party (her).


18 posted on 12/29/2011 4:14:37 PM PST by jafojeffsurf (Return to the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet
If you rightfully sue Rich and Powerful Guy, and it’s his team of Johnny Cochrans against your one Podunk lawyer, you might lose, even if you’re in the right. It’s a big risk.

No. In major liability lawsuits lawyers work on a contingency. If you have a good case then very high priced lawyers will be willing to work for you for nothing until the case is settled. Also under loser pays the lawyers will still want the good cases badly enough that they will be willing to take the risk and contractually agree to absorb the costs if they lose.

19 posted on 12/29/2011 4:15:01 PM PST by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Depending on the dram shop laws in her state, she might have a case.


20 posted on 12/29/2011 4:15:43 PM PST by Graybeard58 (No Obama, No Romney, No Paul, No Huntsman. We can do better than that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jafojeffsurf

” thus the suit should be mute.”

Yeah. It’s “mute” and irrevalunt. Hugh and series, and all that.


21 posted on 12/29/2011 4:19:19 PM PST by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

So she is suing the bar for not checking her I.D. and playing Mommy to make sure she didn’t have too much. She is suing DOT for not maintaining the shoulder of the road. Why not sue the local police department for not pulling her over before she wrecked her car AND why she is at it... sue the car company. For what? Not sure yet but I am sure her lawyer will find something.


22 posted on 12/29/2011 4:20:40 PM PST by momtothree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Let me guess. Cute little blonde who has never been told “No” in her life.


23 posted on 12/29/2011 4:22:24 PM PST by A_perfect_lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus

I don’t know. Lawyers are usually pretty good at weeding out the cases where there is little likelihood of being reimbursed for their time.


24 posted on 12/29/2011 4:25:31 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Attention everyone, I’m not saying I agree with all of this so don’t shoot the messenger:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dram_shop

Serving alcohol to minors is illegal in all 50 states. Many states impose liability on bars for serving minors who subsequently injure themselves or others; deterring minors from being served alcohol. Thus in states like Texas and New Jersey, minors can sue a drinking establishment for their own injuries sustained while intoxicated. In other states, dram shop liability only extends to serving the “habitually intoxicated.”

The majority of states allow for recovery when the defendant knew (or should have known) the customer was intoxicated. Some states have attempted to address this problem through more exacting tests. Missouri’s recently revised dram shop law requires proof that the party demonstrates “significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction.” In Texas, a patron must be so obviously intoxicated that he presents a clear danger to himself and others.

On the other hand, in Massachusetts, the state’s highest court has held that a bar could be sued where a patron exhibiting “drunk, loud and vulgar” behavior was determined to be “visibly intoxicated,” Cimino v. The Milford Keg, Inc., 385 Mass. 323 (1981). In Cimino, evidence showed that the intoxicated patron had been served six or more White Russians by the Milford Keg bar. The patron left the bar, arriving at another bar about fifteen minutes later “totally drunk,” holding a White Russian. The next bar that he went to refused to serve him. Shortly thereafter, the intoxicated patron lost control of his car, drove on a sidewalk, and killed a pedestrian.

Under Illinois’ dram shop law, plaintiffs can recover after demonstrating that:

alcohol was sold to the patron by the defendant;
damages were sustained by the plaintiff;
the sale of alcohol was the proximate cause of the intoxication; and
intoxication was at least one cause of the plaintiff’s damages.

Proximate cause includes the requirement that the dram shop must have been able to foresee that its actions could cause injuries to third parties, but this is true for any establishment that serves (sells) alcohol. One Illinois court allowed a lawsuit against a company that dropped off self-serve barrels of beer at a union picnic.[citation needed]

Some states (such as New Jersey) impose liability on social hosts as well as commercial establishments. This related area of the law is known as social host liability.

Different states’ dram shop acts also differ as to whether a person who becomes intoxicated and injures themselves has a cause of action against the establishment that served them. Some states, such as New Jersey, will allow such a cause of action but will instruct the jury to take the intoxicated person’s own negligence into account. Other states, such as New York, will not allow a person who injures themselves to bring a lawsuit against the bar that served them, but if that person dies will allow such a person’s children to sue the drinking establishment for loss of parental consortium.[1]


25 posted on 12/29/2011 4:26:21 PM PST by Graybeard58 (No Obama, No Romney, No Paul, No Huntsman. We can do better than that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

It’s crazy, but my bet is she wins.


26 posted on 12/29/2011 4:28:27 PM PST by Gator113 (~Just livin' life, my way~.. Newt/Palin-West-2012."got a lot swirling around in my head.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet

I disagree. I believe it would weed out the stupid lawsuits and the suits filed would have more merit and a chance to suceed.

And Rich and Powerful Guy would still be inclined to settle, maybe more so since under loser pays the idea that they just settle (which is what most stupid lawsuits really want) for “nuisance” would be diminished.

And I doubt loser pays stops the crazy juries from awarding massive payouts. I think serious cases wouldn’t be effected much.

I do see your point. It might hamper the good cases at first.


27 posted on 12/29/2011 4:28:31 PM PST by Fledermaus (It's now clear the GOP establishment is uncapable of governing and should resign.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

I’ll take your word for it, but I hope I never have to go there.


28 posted on 12/29/2011 4:28:40 PM PST by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty
A woman is suing a Bluffton bar because a bartender didn't check her age before serving her on the night of the 2009 wreck that paralyzed her.

Apparently the rock between her ears was the part that was the victim of paralysis.

Who's her attorney, John Edwards II?

29 posted on 12/29/2011 4:30:18 PM PST by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
LOL!!! Hey maybe it's a "mute" court.

Chicolini: "Now I aska you one. What has a trunk, but no key, weighs 2,000 pounds and lives in a circus?

Lawyer: "That's irrelevant!"

Chico: Irrelephant? Hey, that'sa that answer. There's a whole lot of irrelephants in the circus
30 posted on 12/29/2011 4:31:33 PM PST by Sudetenland (Anybody but Obama!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

I think they don’t weed that much since most big organizations just settle out of nuisance. They are usally sure they get a quick payout.

And it might stop judge/court shopping like in Mississippi. Didn’t their state legislature have to address this finally?


31 posted on 12/29/2011 4:32:30 PM PST by Fledermaus (It's now clear the GOP establishment is uncapable of governing and should resign.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
BANG!

Not shooting the messenger, but bad law doesn't mean just law. All of these tort laws that have come into being recently seem more designed to feed lawyers and absolve individuals from taking responsibility for their own actions.

Why on Earth should it be a bartender's responsibility to ride herd on how much an individual drinks? Why is it not that persons responsibility. The only reason these laws exist is because businesses have deeper pockets than some schmuck who drinks too much and causes an accident. It's pathetic and it is one of the reasons our society is in decline . . . no one wants to take responsibility for their own actions.
32 posted on 12/29/2011 4:37:39 PM PST by Sudetenland (Anybody but Obama!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

If she wasn’t a minor at the time, doesn;t that come into play? She was 20 (and should be charged with underage drinking).


33 posted on 12/29/2011 4:38:42 PM PST by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Why doesn’t she sue the cops for not arresting her.


34 posted on 12/29/2011 4:41:58 PM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gator113

I was going to say the same thing.

I wouldn’t count her out.

If she doesn’t win she may get an out of court settlement.


35 posted on 12/29/2011 4:47:40 PM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
No. This is where the bar association should be disenfranchised for not disciplining members who participate in frivolous law suits.

Since the Bar association has largely abrogated its roll as a self regulating body, it needs to be replaced by local lay boards who remove idiots.

Lawyers have proven themselves incapable of self regulation.

36 posted on 12/29/2011 4:53:11 PM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OddLane
Have heard it, but I try to drown out those liberal opinions when I hear them with the truth;)
37 posted on 12/29/2011 5:04:05 PM PST by Beowulf9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

How does she intend to prove the bartender DIDN’T check her ID? If she admits to being drunk at the time, how does she know he didn’t?


38 posted on 12/29/2011 5:11:33 PM PST by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sudetenland
All of these tort laws that have come into being recently

Dram shop laws have been in existence since before our constitution, we got ours from English laws.

no one wants to take responsibility for their own actions.

That's been the argument against them since they were written but they still are on the books. That's why she got a lawyer to take the case, she has a good chance of winning - not that I agree with it.

39 posted on 12/29/2011 5:16:29 PM PST by Graybeard58 (No Obama, No Romney, No Paul, No Huntsman. We can do better than that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

The bartender simply needs to say he did card her, and she must have shown a fake ID. (shrug)
People can’t keep bending over for scumbag lawyers and their scumbag clients.


40 posted on 12/29/2011 5:18:08 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beowulf9
Ugh, Fraudoire.

Don't even remind me.

41 posted on 12/29/2011 5:36:28 PM PST by OddLane (If Lionel Hutz and Guy Smiley had a lovechild together, his name would be "Mitt Romney." -KAJ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

How does she know?


42 posted on 12/29/2011 6:03:05 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

That sounds like a great idea. Like many that will never happen.


43 posted on 12/29/2011 6:19:47 PM PST by Twotone (Marte Et Clypeo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: jafojeffsurf

Wow, that almost hurt to read.


44 posted on 12/29/2011 7:10:49 PM PST by Shimmer1 (No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Night out: Chelsea Hess at 20-years-old finished drinking with friends at a local sports bar before taking to her car without wearing her seat belt leading to her car crash

45 posted on 12/29/2011 9:05:30 PM PST by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

In my opinion, the bartender broke the law by serving alcohol to a minor and is guilty of something. Not full responsibility, since she is a licensed driver and responsible for what she does with her car, but he contributed to her accident through criminal negligence. I’m a law and order conservative and don’t believe people should get away with breaking laws, particular ones that cause actual harm to people.


46 posted on 12/29/2011 9:52:58 PM PST by JediJones (Newt-er Obama in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Lets see. Based on her “logic” if she hit me in my vehicle as I was coming home with my family from a night out bowling/minigolfing, and she killed my wife and my two kids. Would she tell me to sue the bar that failed to check her I.D. and the bartender? Personally, she is very lucky to be alive, and that she didn’t kill anyone.


47 posted on 12/30/2011 5:02:17 AM PST by castlegreyskull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady
Brunette (as per post 45) but still cute enough to have lived her whole adult life outside of reality. All thanks to wimpy men who will do anything, nomatter how much of a b**** she is.

It's always fun watching the mean ones get a dose of reality when their looks begin to fade or when they do something outrageous that can't be “fixed by someone”

I doubt she deserved it, but this one got a pretty serious dose of reality.

48 posted on 12/30/2011 6:05:52 AM PST by varyouga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson