Skip to main content
· 7/1/1997

Romano v. Stanley

Citations

  • 684 N.E.2d 19
  • 90 N.Y.2d 444
  • 661 N.Y.S.2d 589
  • 1997 N.Y. LEXIS 1387

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • describing the types of evidence admissible to demonstrate “intoxication” for dram shop liability
  • circumstantial evidence may be used to show visible intoxication, but a visibly intoxicated standard is not met by proof of blood alcohol alone
  • circumstantial evidence may be used to show visible intoxication, but a visibly intoxicated standard is not met by proof of blood alcohol alone
  • circumstantial evidence may be used to show visible intoxication, but a visibly intoxicated standard is not met by proof of blood alcohol alone

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Titone

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.