Tiger Woods hit with lawsuit after employee dies in car crash

they would be if their family gets millions.

 

Seriously? You think someone would make the decision to go get really drunk and risk killing themselves or incurring a debilitating injury because their family MAY get millions in a settlement?

 

Yes. I think a parent would do this to make sure their family is set for life. Not saying its moral.

 

Why is it unfortunate? How is the bar in a lose-lose situation?

Bars are liable for doing stupid things like serving obviously drunk people (who have a reasonable likelihood of then endangering other people). The bar isn't responsible for other people's behavior - they are responsible for their own actions.

 

Why? They could just get a life insurance policy and then get themselves killed doing something stupid. Much easier and no risk of making their family spend tons of money and years of court & appeals on a lawsuit they might lose.

 

I can't imagine anyone ever purposely doing something that...

A. May not work
B. Does not guarantee a victorious law suit

 

Is the bar making these people order drinks? Forcing them at gun point? No, they are asked for a drink by the customer bc he wants one, it's his behavior is it not?
This guy has a long history of getting way too drunk and needing rides home...i imagine there are many other times he didn't get that ride and just drove himself.
It's lose lose bc if you cut off the drunk dude asking for a drink you get an irrate drunk dude in your bar...if you give him it and gets too drunk this is what can happen.

 

The bar could have cut him off and called an Uber to take him home.

 

Hence, irate drunk guy.
I'm sure that goes over well. No more booze for you and you need to leave. Here, we got you an uber. Yeah, no argument will ensue there....

 

You are way in way over your head eject immediately.

 

How so? You think every drunk person at a bar is compliant and peaceful when told they won't be served anymore? I don't think having upset customers and some that won't come back bc you cut them off previously as being considered a 'win'. That's why I say it's lose-lose...if the guy's behavior is to over drink in public why is that on the bar? If he's falling over and can't even stand...sure...that's an easy call to make, but a lot of drunks with high tolerance can look and act fairly sober and be pretty **** faced...but that's the bar's call to make? But like I said, it's the law and the bar is liable even if it takes all the responsibility for the person's behavior off of them.

 

Sometimes drunks at a bar act like drunks at a bar.

 

Except, of course, that it doesn't. You just seem ignorant of how responsibility works. The bar being liable for their actions has no impact on the individual being also responsible for their own.

 

This is a horrible and terribly opportunistic law suit. We have to encourage personal accountability AS A NATION , not constantly expecting your hand to be held. Can't go through life with bowling bumpers .!!

 

So you don't think bars should be expected to follow the law?

Let's do a hypothetical: let's say this guy killed someone else while driving. Should the family of the dead innocent person be able to sue the bar if they knowingly and willingly served him while drunk?

 

You say that until an over served patron plows into your wife's car and kills your family. Drunks will always over drink but bars can and should be responsible for who and how much they serve.

 

Your problem is that someone might get mad? So f***ing what? Then you call the authorities and you're off the hook. You cut them off and got them home (or to the drunk tank) safely. No one is hurt and all you had is someone who was pissed off.

 

Really intriguing, if not odd, how this topic was immediately super partisan between the board members.

I think you guys would fight over anything at this point just for the sake of not liking each other.

 

Post #7 is what started it down that path.