Welcome to New Jersey, the land of no consequences. Want a beer for the road—or 12?
Nearly five years ago Fredrick Voss of Brick Township in South Jersey rode his motorcycle to Tiffany’s Restaurant in Toms River for some drinks. Normally when a man drives himself to the bar he’s fairly careful of his alcohol intake. It’s for this reason that I rarely drive to a bar and when I do it’s merely to meet friends for a couple drinks and catch a game.
Voss met up with his friends as well, except they were most likely named Sam Adams, Jack Daniels and Jose Cuervo and he drank a lot of them. By the time Voss had left the bar he drank his way to a .196 BAC, nearly two and a half times the legal limit. Unsurprisingly Voss crashed his motorcycle and was charged with a DUI.
We’ve all heard this story before: Idiot drinks too much, gets into an accident, loses his license but ultimately learns his lesson. Voss and his attorney didn’t see things that way. In fact they claimed Voss was blameless in his .196 BAC, motorcycle accident and subsequent DUI. So like any good American they filed suit against the restaurant for over-serving.
At first glace Voss’ case is almost laughable. How could a man sue an establishment for giving him drinks that he ordered under him own power? How was a bartender supposed to know he was driving home? Maybe Voss had a high tolerance and didn’t outwardly appear to be drunk. What if Voss lied?
I mean there’s no way this kind of thing could hold up in court right? Well, the one thing about stupidity is sometimes—if you’re bold enough—it might pay off.
Yesterday, the Garden State Supreme Court might have set a very dangerous precedent, ruling 5-2 in favor of the 47-year-old’s ability to sue the bar. Meaning theoretically, people who drive drunk after leaving any bar state of New Jersey can sue the shit out of them for whatever error in judgment they made.
“Today, drunk drivers can evade personal responsibility for their actions and sue restaurateurs in New Jersey for serving them drinks,” said Ann Marie McDonald, spokesman for the New Jersey Lawsuit Reform Alliance.
And she’s totally correct. This is one of the most hair-brained decisions I’ve ever seen. Voss knew he was driving home, yet continued to drink, and now there’s a possibility he’ll get a lot more than his bar tab in return. All because of a loophole between contradicting laws.
As a citizen of New Jersey I’ve stayed proud through a lot of embarrassing shit, but this one just feels wrong.
June 02, 2011 at 10:46 pm, Lee Searles said:
Ya’ll need a proof reader
June 03, 2011 at 11:45 am, Anonymous said:
OK! Next, let’s sue auto dealers for selling cars to substandard drivers. Yes, the blame lies somewhere. I got it, lets sue God for putting this person on earth!
June 10, 2011 at 1:09 am, VIRAGO99 said:
This is freakin ridiculous!! I live in VA so I really have no reason to complain. Thank goodness this stupidity hasnt shown up here yet (Don’t worry, we have our fair share of it, just not this). I think this is even worse than the chic who sued Mickey D’s because the coffee was hot!! WTH is wrong with these judges. Personal accountability has completely disappeared!!
June 15, 2011 at 6:26 pm, Voice of Reason said:
That wasn’t a frivolous lawsuit: for years, McDonald’s had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee – that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants. McDonald’s knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries – more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation – and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries – third degree burns (what you get from FIRE) on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay. The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn’t have brought the lawsuit against McDonald’s had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills.A McDonald’s quality assurance manager testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the risk of serving dangerously hot coffee and had no plans to either turn down the heat or to post warning about the possibility of severe burns, even though most customers wouldn’t think it was possible.After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald’s was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald’s had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct, and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million dollars. (The equivalent of just two days of coffee sales, McDonalds Corporation generates revenues in excess of 1.3 million dollars daily from the sale of its coffee, selling 1 billion cups each year.) However, on appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.
June 10, 2011 at 2:39 am, Notla7 said:
I think some of the judges who pass these ridiculous laws should be taken off the bench. it’s free will. If you drink and drive you are guilty. Why are the courts passing the buck? Common sense needs to kick in here both for the drunk who wrecked his bike while drinking, and the judge who passed the law allowing the drunk to sue when clearly it’s the drunks fault for drinking while intoxicated. Get the judge who passed this off the bench and train him in the law again, and get the drunk off the road and punish him like he should be. He’s guilty. Shame on the judge for being an idiot.
June 22, 2011 at 2:19 pm, db said:
Umm…judges don’t pass laws.
June 22, 2011 at 3:37 pm, CBEMT said:
Keep telling yourself that.
June 22, 2011 at 2:19 pm, db said:
Umm…judges don’t pass laws.