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.
On Oyola v. Piolin (CV13-6040777)
A court rejected defendants' claims that the jury should have been instructed about the defense of assumption of risk in a Dram Shop Act case.
Plaintiff Jasmin Oyola alleged the following facts. On March 17, 2012, Oyola and her friend, Shandeline Gutierrez, went to Piolin, which was a dance club and bar, and each consumed three to four shots of vodka in the parking lot, before they entered. Gutierrez testified that she only consumed two drinks at Piolin's. Cynthia Delarose testified that Gutierrez appeared kind of tipsy when she arrived at the bar at approximately 11 p.m. and that she bought Gutierrez a drink later that night. Oyola testified that Gutierrez stumbled a bit and slurred her words at the bar and stumbled again and grabbed Oyola's arm as they walked to the parking lot when they left. On Interstate 84, Gutierrez allegedly collided with a barrier, which caused a single-car accident. A Connecticut state trooper issued Gutierrez a ticket for failure to drive in a single lane, in violation of Connecticut General Statute ยง14-236. Oyola sued the bar and its permittee and alleged its agents and employees recklessly, willfully and wantonly served alcohol to Gutierrez. In Oct. 2015, a jury awarded Oyola 68,653 in economic damages and 130,000 in non-economic damages, for pain and suffering.
Defendants moved to set aside the verdict and for a collateral source reduction. To prevail on a Dram Shop Act claim, plaintiff was required to prove:
- sale pf alcoholic liquor
- to an intoxicated person; and
- the intoxicated person caused injury to another individual or property s a result of intoxication.
The jury reasonably could have concluded that Gutierrez was served alcohol when intoxicated and that her intoxication caused the motor vehicle accident. The court rejected defendants' claims that the jury instructions were incorrect and that the jury should have been instructed about the defense of assumption of the risk. That defense, wrote the court, was incompatible with the public policy underlying the act of protecting the public at large and inconsistent with the dram shop act's language. Judgement granted in the amount of $140,041.
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.
Source: J. Noble. Passenger of Drunk Driver Won $140,041 in Dram Shop Case. CONN. LAW TRIBUNE, May 16, 2016 at 22.
