Cafe's Inattention to Drunk Patron Not Unreasonable, Says Court
by
Joseph C. Maya on May. 01, 2017
Accident & Injury Personal Injury Business Government State and Local
Summary: Blog post about a cafe that was not held liable when a patron drunkenly assaulted another customer.
Contact the personal injury attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today. We can help you get the just compensation you deserve for your injuries or those of a loved one. For a free initial consultation, call 203-221-3100 or email JMaya@Mayalaw.com.
Plaintiff patron brought an action against defendants, an assailant, a restaurant, and its permittee to recover damages for his injuries that were caused by an assault at the restaurant. The restaurant and permittee moved to strike the fifth count of the patron's substituted complaint in which he asserted that his injuries were proximately caused by their recklessness.
The restaurant and permittee contended that the allegations contained in the fifth count of the substitute complaint were not sufficient to support a cause of action for recklessness. The patron claimed that they had failed to prevent the alleged assault although they knew that the assailant was intoxicated, violent, and antagonistic and had ample time to intervene and prevent harm to the patron. The patron also claimed that the restaurant and permittee had failed to warn him, despite the fact that the assailant had been loud, boisterous, and antagonistic towards him. Finally, the patron claimed that the restaurant and permittee had failed to remove the assailant from the premises, although they had ample notice of his intoxicated state and potential harm to the patron. The court construed the facts alleged in the light most favorable to the patron and determined that they did not give rise to a claim for recklessness. It found that the alleged actions, or inactions, of the restaurant and permittee were more akin to inadvertence or inattention than that of conduct that was highly unreasonable, intentional, or involving an extreme departure from ordinary care. The court granted the motion to strike the fifth count of the substitute complaint.
At Maya Murphy, P.C., our personal injury attorneys are dedicated to achieving the best results for individuals and their family members and loved ones whose daily lives have been disrupted by injury, whether caused by a motor vehicle or pedestrian accident, a slip and fall, medical malpractice, a defective product, or otherwise. Our attorneys are not afraid to aggressively pursue and litigate cases and have extensive experience litigating personal injury matters in both state and federal courts, and always with regard to the unique circumstances of our client and the injury he or she has sustained.
Please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 203-221-3100, or at JMaya@mayalaw.com, to schedule a free consultation.
Source: Pinkin v. Hungry Tiger Café, 1994 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2883 (Conn. Super. Ct. Nov. 10, 1994)