Club Not Liable for Drunk Stripper's Crash

LecherousMonk
Mom's basement
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170906/ba…

7 comments

Latest

shailynn
7 years ago
That is a very serious statement made by the Ohio Supreme Court.
whodey
7 years ago
Kind of a surprising outcome and it should make for some interesting discussions in the DeWine family.

Just to be on the safe side in the future any dancers that get drunk at work should find a nice PL to drive them home at the end of their shift.
mark94
7 years ago
The law is the law. If it's appropriate for clubs to be liable in situations like this, then the law needs changing.
san_jose_guy
7 years ago
Well, this idea of holding bar owners liable has always been controversial.

As I see it, drive to bars have to be a thing of the past.

California law prohibits nudity when you have alcohol. The intention was never to create a higher grade of strip clubs and strip club dancers, but I consider this to have been the effect.

Now I would still say that the best are the Membership Clubs. Most are BYOB. But we have now the example of Sights in Newark NJ, which does not even allow BYOB.

http://clubsights.com/about/

Absolutely Not. Other private clubs allow BYOB as a way to cater to their membership, we do not. Sometimes alcohol and nude women are not a good mixture particularly when it comes to maintaining the safety of the dancers and the members.
http://clubsights.com/faq/

Sights sounds like a Strip Club Heaven, at least based on what I can glean from what is written.

SJG

King Crimson, Hyde Park, live 1969
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiA_q-Kf…
LecherousMonk
7 years ago
I believe DeWine the Younger has a very bad rating on whatever system they use for judges.
whodey
7 years ago
After reading the court's opinion it looks like the reason they didn't find the club liable is that it wasn't proven that the dancer was “noticeably intoxicated" when the club continued to serve her alchol. In fact the plaintiff's attorney never questioned any of the bartenders or other staff about whether the dancer seemed intoxicated.

That seems like a big mistake on the plaintiff's part since Ohio's Dram Shop Law only holds a bar responsible when they "knowingly sold" alcohol to a "noticeably intoxicated" person or to a person under age 21."

If they could have have proven that the dancer was "noticeably intoxicated" the plaintiff would have likely won.

I guess the fact that the club knew exactly how many drinks had been bought for the dancer during her shift and the fact that she admitted under oath that she was drunk wasn't enough to prove she was "noticeably intoxicated".

A lot of dancers are good at hiding how drunk they are during their shift so she may not have been "noticeably intoxicated."
san_jose_guy
7 years ago
Alcohol free clubs! Membership No BYOB clubs!

Higher quality of dancers!

SJG
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion