Should this Strip Club in West Chicago Illinois be held liable?

Question

Lawsuit to continue against West Chicago strip club linked to fatal crash
KANE COUNTY - A Kane County judge Friday declined to dismiss a lawsuit against a West Chicago strip club accused of allowing a drunken patron -- who later killed two people in a fiery crash -- to drive away.

Diamonds Gentleman Club, which does not serve liquor, shares responsibility for patrons who consume their own liquor there, Judge F. Keith Brown ruled. The club should have concluded that driver John Homatas would probably cause the 2004 accident because he was intoxicated, Brown wrote.

The club's owners argued it does not owe a special duty to customers.
Lawyers for the families of victims John Chiariello and April Simmons, who was pregnant, contend Diamonds encouraged Homatas to drink the liquor he and his friends brought.
They also gave him the keys to his valet-parked car after ejecting him from the club when he showed signs of intoxication.

Homatas, 26, of Wayne was convicted and sentenced in October to 12 years in prison for aggravated DUI and reckless homicide.

I vote YES. If he was too drunk to be in their club he was too drunk to drive.

That's why Illinois has the "DRAM LAW" and even though the club did not serve liquor, it allowed it on the premises. Therefore, the Dram Law applies to them.

Answer 1

The club should be held liable because the "entertainment" they provided encouraged drinking behavior even though the drink was not sold by them. The right thing for them to do is to tell the patron to stop drinking on the premise or leave before he was too drunk, not afterward. If the club knows the patron is drunk and still ejects him and forces him to drive in that condition and could reasonably foresee that he could get in an accident, then they have the duty to interfere. This case is about the club's control of its patron's behavior. Suppose the patron came to the club already drunk, then the club is likely not liable as they had no control over when, where and how much he drinks. In this case, the patron actually drank excessively on the club property during business hours. The club should have told him to stop or waited till he sober up, or at least call the police. Those are the alternatives and the club failed to do any of it and should be held liable.

This is not a good samaritan case, where the bystander had no prior relationship with the "wrongdoer." The club benefited by making money from the patron. As a result, the club is not just an innocent bystander, or a third party. They have a direct relationship to the patron and because of its failure to intervene, someone died as a result.

SouthArk: No, the world is not full of "what ifs" We don't look at "what if" the club would have called the police and no drunk driving would have occurred. We don't make up facts. But we do look at the cost-benefit analysis and the availability of an alternatives, such as calling a cop. That is just common sense. If you see a drunk person wondering around your neighborhood, or someone drunk driving, wouldn't you call the cop too? That's why we have police.

And as to the store, selling alcohol gives the store very little control over the fashion it would be consumed such as who would consume it, where, when, how fast and whether you decide to hop in a car and drive afterward. In law, we said it is unforeseeable and cut off the store's liability. So to answer your question, yes, there is a cut off point but it is often contested as to where this cut off point should be.

Answer 2

They should be liable. They allowed a drunk person to consume liquor and then let him just go. Is it one of those odd places where customers can bring in their own liquor (as a member for a fee?) and they charge for mixers? Or was it just a thing where the drinking is overlooked.

In both cases I think the state itself should actually be liable. In most states you pay bigtime for a liquor license. Beverage control can come in anytime so the owner calls the police or does not allow a person to drive...... as the owner can lose his business if something like this happens.

It is a strip club for christs sake. Guys won't be drinking or show up drunk? They should have never been given a license for business as there are no controls in regard to liquor. Was this the first time someone got into an accident or say the police had been called? You can't tell me the local PD didn't know what was going on.

Though nothing brings these people back I would sue everybody. Maybe if only one life gets saved later it would be worth it. The laws should be challenged and if that goes through the county or local PD would be next. It is ridiculous that such a business would be able to operate without a liquor license.

Answer 3

It was the responsibility of the club to not allow an overly intoxicated patron to drive from the club. They should have made other transportation arrangements for Homastas. The tragic accident could have been avoided if they had acted in a responsible manner. The Strip Club should most definately be held responsible.

Answer 4

There have been over 15,000 alcohol related fatalities every year for the past several years. Many of those are probably from people getting drunk at a bar/restaurant/club and than driving. Why do people like to point fingers instead of taking responsibility for their own actions. If we blamed business owners for all of these deaths, you would have to shut down pretty much every bar/restaurant/club in existence.
On the other hand, if he was removed for being too drunk, and than given his keys, that's a different story, if it's true.

Answer 5

It is a slightly different scenario then a person just hopping in their car after an evening of drinking.

He was handed the keys to a valet parked car after being ejected for being too intoxicated. That is irresponsible, and most certainly contributing to the subsequent events.

However had the keys had been handed to a sober friend, it would have been a whole other scenario.

I do firmly believe in personal responsibility. People choose to get behind the wheel while intoxicated. It is not the responsibility of another to monitor your alcohols consumption. However, when the party (this gentleman's club) handed a visibly intoxicated patron the keys to his car, they assumed partial responsibility for his actions.

Answer 6

I disagree How are they to judge next time?? Are they going to give Breathalizers & Blood tests as you leave?

This is a very unfortunate accident but people have to be held reliable for their own actions NOT expect big brother to look after them.

It is very sad that lives are lost because people make poor decisions & my heart goes out to those who mourn & I even understand the anger & wanting to find some one responsable but how can one be expected to read the future?

People drinking usually need no encouragement. I wish that no one would ever drink & drive & everyone would wear a seat belt. But as long as alcohol is around people will travel intoxicated. I lost my best friend to DUI but I don't blame the bar or God. Its been 16 years & it still hurts.

Answer 7

Yes, Although the club doesn't serve liquor, they allowed him to consume it on their property, which in a sense is giving consent. If he was ejected from the club and was visibly intoxicated they should have either called a cab or the police. Although the club isn't wholly responsible for his actions, their failure to act was a contributing factor and are partially liable.

Answer 8

Further to Harold S comment:

When the adult with the free will crosses the line and his actions place him in a position that poses danger or harm to others, then society has the right - and obligation - to step in: in this case the club management. Of course the drunk is primarily responsible.

I think the club management is definitely culpable. Remember the night club fire in RI a few years back that killed 100 people. The club owners and band manager were found guilty - and served time. Their irresponsible actions caused these deaths.

Answer 9

Sometimes it's difficult to tell how intoxicated someone is by their outward behavior, particularly a seasoned drinker. But if the dram law applies to them because they are BYOB, then I guess they get what they get... In this case he was kicked out of the club for being very obviously drunk, but they handed him his keys. Although I don't think the dram law is fair %100 of the time, it is certainly fair in this case. They should have called him a taxi and prevented him from driving off their lot.

Answer 10

This was, I assume, an adult with free will. In our society we try to allow others to take or share in the responsibility for our actions.
This gentleman bought and consumed the liquor. He is responsible for his actions. While the club perhaps has a moral obligation to not allow him to drive, they should not be liable under the law