Courtroom Observation, Liberty University Essay

1772 Words Sep 25th, 2013 8 Pages
Darlene E.B Hines

Professor Hudson

BUSI 301 Fall

September 22, 2013

Courtroom Observation:

2008 1L Moot Court Tournament at the Liberty University School of Law, White V. Gibbs CA# -8776-CV285.

This case is between the (plaintiff) Mrs. White and the (defendants) Patrick Gibbs and Stand Alone Properties, L.L.C. as O’Malley’s Tavern. A Motion of Summary Judgment on behalf of O’Malley’s Tavern in the US District Court of Northern District of Indiana. Is being argued/presented.

Briefly; Mrs. White is suing the defendant Patrick Gibbs of O’Malley’s Tavern where as the bartender served Mr. Hard with alcoholic beverages which lead to his intoxication, thus getting into his vehicle, driving erratic chasing both Mrs.
…show more content…
This came to about 6 alcoholic beverages in within that sort timeframe. This is a total of 11 known alcoholic beverages served and consumed in such a shot period of time that it would be indicative to have observed signs of Intoxification.. Also the factor that his blood alcohol level of twice the legal limit would determine that the patron was served to Intoxification. In Jackson V Gore it is established that they can prove Actual Visual Knowledge of Intoxification.. The four factors of the server continued to serve the alcohol (13 in all charged) in a short period of time, collected the money , behavior of patron before service and leaving and behavior of patron upon leaving would establish an Actual Visual Knowledge of Intoxication. Plaintiff asks to deny the Motion of summary Judgment.

2. Attorney Babot is arguing the summary judgment to defendant of proximate cause should not to be granted for the following 3 reasons: . (1) It is determined that a jury could award damages to the plaintiff, thus summary of law this precludes judgment. (2) Injuries to the plaintiff and death of her husband were the foreseeable consequences of service to a visibly intoxicated person. (3) Criminal act can be the intervening act that does not break the can of causation because the act is easily foreseeable, There are differences in truths offered by both parties. The defendants state this was a criminal act which breaks the chain of

More about Courtroom Observation, Liberty University Essay

Open Document