Williamson v. the Old Brogue, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the common law does not recognize a tort duty to not serve alcohol to an inebriated patron who could foreseeably injure others
• stating that “a decision ... to abrogate such a fundamental rule as the one under consideration is the function of the legislative, not the judicial, branch of government”
• holding that innocent third party injured by the intoxicated person was not a member of the class intended to benefit from the statute and that therefore violation of the statute neither constitutes negligence per se nor furnishes the basis for a civil action in damages
• holding “a statute may define the standard of care to be exercised where there is an underlying common-law duty....”
• finding that “the common law considers the act of selling the intoxicating beverage as too remote to be a proximate cause of an injury resulting from the negligent conduct of the purchaser of the drink.”
• finding the act of selling alcohol to a driver who became intoxicated and injured plaintiff to be too remote to be the proximate cause of plaintiffs injuries

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).