Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Allosaurs_r_us
The state Supreme Court ruling only allows the case to proceed. The justices did not rule on whether Pioneer was negligent."We're pleased," Coleman said. "Now we can go forward with the trial itself."

Easy yourself, big guy. You should read the entire article.

The courts have simply allowed the trial to continue, so they will let the attorney make his case and the defense make theirs.

My take is this:

The cashier should not have turned on the pump, if he was that obviously drunk. So yes, the station may have some liability.

The two guys who helped him are complete idiots, but probably not either legally guilty or legally responsible.

Consider this: If the cashier had sold him alcohol, in his condition, could she be held responsible for that?

107 posted on 08/22/2005 8:36:17 PM PDT by Michael.SF. ('That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together,' Cindy Sheehan")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]


To: Michael.SF.
I did read the whole article. The employees were not on duty, therefore the business is not responsible and the case should have been thrown out. If there is culpability, it would be the two "off duty" employees acting as private citizens period, not the business, which is what the court was asked to decide. You cannot hold the business responsible for what their employees do when they are not on the clock. To do so throws common sense out the window and would have so far reaching repercussions it would make justice in this country a joke.
 
As far as the employee behind the counter, he/she stated the guy slapped the money on the counter and left. The employee stated this thug pushed his way to the front of the line. He already paid for the gas. Should the employee actually leave his.her post in order to argue the fact with a drunk? What grounds would he/she have to not sell him the gas? The fact he was drunk? Don't be ridiculous. It is not against the law to sell gas to a drunk person nor should it be. Should citizens be held responsible for what they perceive as possible illegal acts? It is insane to even suggest you can hold the business responsible if you "read" the story.
 
The judges should have thrown this out and never heard it in the first place. The only thing they accomplished is to open the door for another couple thousand "victims" to figure out how to screw innocent people.

109 posted on 08/22/2005 11:26:38 PM PDT by Allosaurs_r_us (I can't use the cell phone in the car. I have to keep my hands free for making obscene gestures)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson