Posted on 04/18/2006 8:20:35 AM PDT by CedarDave
An Albuquerque bar and a bartender are in trouble for selling alcohol to two intoxicated men who were killed when a drunken driver crashed into the taxi cab they were riding in.
Ray Martinez, 50, and Kenneth Martinez, 36, had been at Malarky's before calling the cab to take them home. They and cab driver Daniel Magnuson, 46, were killed when a drunken driver ran a red light and collided with the cab before dawn on Thanksgiving Day.
The Special Investigations Division of the state Department of Public Safety announced Monday it has cited Malarky's for selling to intoxicated persons under the state Liquor Control Act. Bartender Mary Lotspeich was also cited for the same offense.
Division investigators said toxicology reports show one of the two passengers in the cab had a blood-alcohol content of 0.298 percent, more than twice the standard of 0.14 percent used to support the charge of selling to an intoxicated person.
The other passenger had a blood-alcohol content of 0.12 percent, according to investigators.
The division had previously cited the Horse & Angel Tavern for over-serving Gabriel Gurule, the driver of the vehicle that crashed into the cab. Toxicology tests showed Gurule's blood-alcohol content was more than twice the legal limit of 0.08 percent. Gurule pleaded no contest in March to three counts of homicide by motor vehicle and one count of great bodily injury.
(Excerpt) Read more at abqjournal.com ...
(The ABQ Journal is now free again though you have to watch a short advertisement before going to the article)
This is the strangest story I've heard in a long time. I'm not sure I follow the logic, much less the law.
I can see the holding the bar responsible for selling to a drunk who kills someone (although it would have to be proven) but this is obscene.
We had a local pub sued for serving to a guy who caused a death. Problem was, he was only .07 BAC when the accident happened, and the law was .10. (.08 now)
They finally got it beaten, but it broke'em
I don't get it.
If the guys had taken the cab because their feet hurt, would the shoe manufacturer have been sued? What possible difference does it make why they took the cab?
Forget those two things...they don't matter.
Follow the MONEY!!!
Seems to be one hell of a disconnect between cause-and-effect here.
"I don't get it."
Here's the deal.
The fine appears to have nothing to do with the fact that these people died.
The fine is simply due to the fact that the State found out that this guy was served drinks wayyyyy after he was obviously drunk, which is a violation of NM law.
The issue before us isn't about a wrongful fine in the death case, but whether the State should fine a bar who serves an obviously intoxicated person.
Backdoor prohibition. You can't outlaw booze but you can outlaw everything related to it thereby making criminals out of ordinary citizens.
Wait...
So the victims (who were passengers, not drivers) were drunk, and that's why the bar that served them is getting sued?
Unreal.
This is not (yet) a "deep-pockets" civil suit.
So what's the bodily injury charge about? Injuring [failing to kill himself] in the crash?
o.o8 is twice the legal limit??? NM has a .04 DWI law?? That is only one or two beers.
Good question. Don't think any others than those killed were injured by his actions.
I just noticed the crash happened 'just before dawn.' I guess this means the clubs are open until, what 4:00? 6:00? That's got to have something to do with the problem.
As was said, that's a money issue. A greed issue. Bars staying open for the second shift?
Except maybe the cab was 'injured' as property of the owner?
Well, your explanation makes more sense than the article (though I only read what was posted and not the entire article). Maybe they should just install breathalyzers in bars.
Dont Drink and Ride in Cabs!
The driver of the vehicle that crashed into the cab had more than twice the legal limit of 0.08, i.e. greater than 0.16 BAC.
I fail to see where the bar or bartender is being held responsible for the crash. They are being held responsible for serving alcoholic beverages to two individuals who, under applicable law, shouldn't have been served.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.