Bar Owner Case Brief
390
Ga.
638 SOUTH EASTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES
282 Ga.App. 229
BECKS
v.
PIERCE.
tained in automobile accident with intoxicated bar patron in the absence of evidence that bar owner knew that patron was going to drive home. West’s Ga.Code Ann. § 51–1–
40(b).
No. A06A1149.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Nov. 2, 2006.
Certiorari Denied Feb. 5, 2007.
Background: Motorist brought action against bar owner under Dram Shop Act for injuries she sustained in automobile accident with intoxicated driver. The State
Court, DeKalb County, Carriere, J., denied bar owner’s motion for summary judgment. Bar owner appealed.
Holding: The Court of Appeals, Mikell, J., held that bar owner was not liable under the Dram Shop Act in the …show more content…
In opposition to Becks’s motion for summary judgment, plaintiff introduced the affidavit of John Holbrook, a professor in pharmacology and toxicology. Holbrook’s opinions were based upon various facts in the record, including but not limited to,
Fleming’s weight, the amount of alcohol that he consumed and the time that he was last served, the one marijuana joint he smoked for five to seven minutes between
6:30 and 7:30 p.m. earlier on the evening in question,4 the police officer’s testimony regarding Fleming’s visible signs of intoxication, and Fleming’s blood alcohol level after the accident. Holbrook opined that
Fleming was in a noticeable state of intoxication that should have been obvious to the
Bar’s employees when he was last served an alcoholic beverage between 2:00 and 2:30
a.m.; that at the time Fleming was last served, his blood alcohol level would have been approximately 0.15 grams or higher; that the Bar’s employees stationed at the door should have observed Fleming’s symptoms of central nervous system depression caused by a combination of the consumption of alcohol, use of marijuana, and
Ga.
638 SOUTH EASTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES
282 Ga.App. 229
BECKS
v.
PIERCE.
tained in automobile accident with intoxicated bar patron in the absence of evidence that bar owner knew that patron was going to drive home. West’s Ga.Code Ann. § 51–1–
40(b).
No. A06A1149.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Nov. 2, 2006.
Certiorari Denied Feb. 5, 2007.
Background: Motorist brought action against bar owner under Dram Shop Act for injuries she sustained in automobile accident with intoxicated driver. The State
Court, DeKalb County, Carriere, J., denied bar owner’s motion for summary judgment. Bar owner appealed.
Holding: The Court of Appeals, Mikell, J., held that bar owner was not liable under the Dram Shop Act in the …show more content…
In opposition to Becks’s motion for summary judgment, plaintiff introduced the affidavit of John Holbrook, a professor in pharmacology and toxicology. Holbrook’s opinions were based upon various facts in the record, including but not limited to,
Fleming’s weight, the amount of alcohol that he consumed and the time that he was last served, the one marijuana joint he smoked for five to seven minutes between
6:30 and 7:30 p.m. earlier on the evening in question,4 the police officer’s testimony regarding Fleming’s visible signs of intoxication, and Fleming’s blood alcohol level after the accident. Holbrook opined that
Fleming was in a noticeable state of intoxication that should have been obvious to the
Bar’s employees when he was last served an alcoholic beverage between 2:00 and 2:30
a.m.; that at the time Fleming was last served, his blood alcohol level would have been approximately 0.15 grams or higher; that the Bar’s employees stationed at the door should have observed Fleming’s symptoms of central nervous system depression caused by a combination of the consumption of alcohol, use of marijuana, and