Christen v. Lee
| Decision Date | 26 October 1989 |
| Docket Number | 55367-0,Nos. 55355-6,s. 55355-6 |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | Robert Steve CHRISTEN, Respondent, v. Victor K. LEE, Harold C. Lee, Robert C. Lee and Mitchell Lee, d/b/a South China Doll Restaurant; and Hi-Way Prevention Patrol & Guards, Inc., a Washington corporation; and Richard A. Oden and Jane Doe Oden, husband and wife, Petitioners. Matt LONG and Debbie Long, husband and wife, and Nichole Lynn Long and Angela Laurine Long, Minors, through their Guardian Ad Litem, Debbie Long, Petitioners, v. Steven Kenneth COATES, Petitioner, John Doe Bard and Elizabeth Jean Bard, husband and wife and the marital community composed thereof; and Charles E. Lyman and Jane Doe Lyman, husband and wife; David M. Anderson and Jane Doe Anderson, husband and wife; and John M. Brown and Jane Doe Brown, husband and wife, all as partners doing business as R.F. McDougall's; and R.F. McDougall's, Inc., a Washington corporation, Respondents. |
Hackett, Beecher & Hart, James Beecher, Theodore H. Millan, Betts, Patterson & Mines, P.S., William P. Fite, Richard S. Lowell, Seattle, for petitioners Lee, et al.
Shea & Kuffel, Edward F. Shea, Pasco, for petitioners Long.
Horton, Wilkins & Faurholt, William J. Connor, Kennewick, for petitioner Coates.
Burns, Schneiderman & Finkle, P.S., Warren L. Dewar, Jr., Seattle, for respondent Christen.
Reakes, Rettig, Osborne, Forgette & O'Donnell, Brian J. Iller, Kennewick, for respondent R.F. McDougall's, Inc., et al.
These two consolidated cases concern the liability of a public drinking establishment for a criminal assault committed by one of its patrons. In neither case is the liability of the party who consumed the alcohol and committed the assault in issue.
Robert S. Christen arrived at the bar of the South China Doll Restaurant (China Doll) close to midnight in the evening of October 26, 1984. Christen drank at the bar until it closed approximately 2 hours later. He testified that when the bar was closing, he left the bar area to use the restroom in the lobby of the China Doll. He states that upon leaving the restroom, he headed back toward the bar, but was then confronted by three individuals, all apparently regular patrons of the China Doll with whom Christen was not previously acquainted. According to Christen, these individuals were screaming and laughing; they punched him; and one of them brandished a gun and told him to "get the hell out of here." Christen testified that he complied with their request to leave and that he was subsequently shot in the head on the walkway leading from the China Doll to the parking lot. He suffered serious injuries.
Christen's version of the night's events is corroborated to some extent by the testimony of Daniel Wiggins, a customer waiting for a take-out order in the lobby of the China Doll. Wiggins observed two men escorting Christen through the lobby, telling him to leave, when another man approached who appeared "ticked off" and sported a large bulge in his coat pocket. Next, according to Wiggins, this latter individual left the premises and the other two men proceeded to escort Christen out of the China Doll. Wiggins then heard a shot ring out. Wiggins further testified that there were several employees of the China Doll in the lobby while all this was occurring, including two or three waitresses and a cashier.
Rebecca Markham, a cocktail waitress and bartender at the China Doll, testified that she too was aware of a commotion in the lobby. According to her, "[i]t looked like it was going to get heavy." She also states that Richard Oden, an armed and uniformed security guard at the China Doll, was aware of this commotion and he remarked that he thought there was going to be a fight.
The security guard did not intervene and claims he was unaware of any such confrontation. Three other China Doll employees (Harry Locke, Patty Lee, and Theresa Hendrickson) also testified that they were unaware of a confrontation in the lobby prior to the shooting.
Criminal charges were filed against one Rolando Visitacion in connection with the shooting. Visitacion was a regular patron of the China Doll and in attendance at the bar on the night of the shooting. Nothing in the record suggests that Visitacion had ever exhibited any vicious propensities while at the China Doll, including on the night in question, until the confrontation which is asserted to have occurred in the lobby when the bar was closing.
Two China Doll employees present on the night in question (Theresa Hendrickson and Patty Lee) suspected Visitacion of sometimes carrying a gun. Diane Thomas, a former employee of the China Doll, also testified that Visitacion carried a gun and that when she used to work there she had a practice of taking his gun and holding it for him in her purse behind the bar. Thomas states that on the night in question she was at the bar as a customer and that Visitacion relinquished his gun to her. She further testified that she returned the gun to him in the parking lot outside of the China Doll near closing time when she thought he was going home.
Diane Thomas also testified that she thought Visitacion was intoxicated while at the bar based on the amount of alcohol she saw him consume. Nothing in the record, however, indicates that he actually appeared intoxicated to others around him.
Christen brought an action alleging negligence against the individuals doing business as the South China Doll Restaurant, the company under contract to provide security for the restaurant and the security guard on duty the night of the shooting. These latter parties, the petitioners herein, are for convenience hereinafter collectively referred to as the "China Doll". The China Doll moved for summary judgment in its favor and the Superior Court granted the motion. The Court of Appeals reversed the Superior Court. We granted the China Doll's petition for review. 1
On September 15, 1984, Steven K. Coates, 20 years of age and home on leave from service in the Navy, spent the afternoon and part of the evening drinking beer with his friend, Dana Soderquist. Coates estimates that he personally consumed from 12 to 15 beers during this time. Later that evening, Coates and Soderquist entered R.F. McDougall's (McDougall's), a drinking establishment. The record indicates that while there, Coates was served several drinks of intoxicating liquor. Nothing in the record indicates that any effort was made to determine whether Coates was underage, and a waitress, Ann Straalsund, testified that Coates was "very drunk" while at McDougall's.
Coates claims to recall very little concerning the events of the evening in question. He did testify, however, that he might have shown a switchblade knife which he had recently purchased in Mexico to the bartender at McDougall's. Coates states that he may have done so because the knife was uncommon. The bartender was also a friend of his. Nonetheless, the record contains nothing which suggests that Coates exhibited any vicious propensities while at McDougall's.
Coates left McDougall's with Soderquist in Coates' mother's automobile around midnight. Matt Long, a Hanford patrolman, testified that the following events then transpired. Coates passed Long on the highway at a high rate of speed, Long at that time being off duty and on his way home. Shortly thereafter, Long observed Coates' vehicle strike another vehicle. The vehicle which Coates struck went off the road, but Coates continued on his way. Long pursued and caught up with Coates, and Coates then pulled off onto the shoulder of the road. Long and Coates exited their vehicles. Coates appeared confused and wandered back and forth from his car. After some discussion between them, Coates began walking back in the direction of the vehicle that he had struck. Long went with him. After awhile, Coates observed police lights at the scene of the accident and refused to proceed any further in that direction. They then headed back in the direction of their vehicles. On the way back, Coates tried to walk behind Long and Long, uncomfortable with this maneuver, started jogging towards his vehicle. Coates ran after Long and stabbed him twice in the back, causing serious injuries. 2
Long, together with his wife and minor children, brought a negligence action against Coates, Coates' parents, the individuals doing business as R.F. McDougall's, and R.F. McDougall's, Inc. Again for the sake of convenience, the individuals doing business as R.F. McDougall's and R.F. McDougall's, Inc. are hereinafter collectively referred to as "McDougall's". Coates, in turn, filed a cross claim against McDougall's. McDougall's then moved for summary judgment in its favor; the Superior Court granted the motion, dismissing the claims made against McDougall's by the Longs. The Superior Court also dismissed the cross claims made by Coates to the extent that the cross claims sought recovery of damages arising out of Coates' stabbing of Long. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Superior Court. Both the Longs and Coates filed petitions for review which we granted. 3
Four principal issues are presented by these two consolidated cases.
ISSUE ONE. As concerns a cause of action for furnishing intoxicating liquor to an obviously intoxicated person, is evidence of the amount of alcohol consumed sufficient to get such a cause of action past a motion for summary judgment?
ISSUE TWO. Is a criminal assault a foreseeable result of furnishing intoxicating liquor to an obviously intoxicated person?
ISSUE THREE. Is a public drinking establishment that violates statutes prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquor to a person who appears intoxicated, or who is a minor, per se liable for a criminal assault later committed by that person?
ISSUE FOUR. For purposes of summary judgment, is there sufficient evidence in the record that the China...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Seattle v. Monsanto Co.
...duty owed by the defendant." McKown v. Simon Prop. Grp., Inc., 182 Wash. 2d 752, 763, 344 P.3d 661 (2015) (quoting Christen v. Lee, 113 Wash. 2d 479, 492, 780 P.2d 1307 (1989) ). Foreseeability is normally an issue for the trier of fact. Hansen, 118 Wash. 2d at 484, 824 P.2d 483 (citing Chr......
-
Williams v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am.
...have premised the duty of commercial vendors on the need to protect innocent bystanders from intoxicated patrons, Christen v. Lee, 113 Wash.2d 479, 497, 780 P.2d 1307 (1989) (citing Shelby v. Keck, 85 Wash.2d 911, 914, 541 P.2d 365 (1975) ; Waldron v. Hammond, 71 Wash.2d 361, 363, 428 P.2d ......
-
Pacheco v. United States
...foreseeable" because " ‘[t]he concept of foreseeability limits the scope of the duty owed.’ " CP at 96 (quoting Christen v. Lee , 113 Wash.2d 479, 492, 780 P.2d 1307 (1989) ). The court decided that the issue of foreseeability in this case must go to trial because a "reasonable fact finder ......
-
Nivens v. 7-11 Hoagy's Corner
...not find, by a preponderance of evidence, that a reasonable person would foresee criminal conduct on the part of a third person. In Christen v. Lee, 46 the plaintiff was a patron in a public drinking establishment called the China Doll. Near closing time, he was accosted by three other patr......
-
Clearing the Air: Ordinary Negligence in Take-home Asbestos Exposure Litigation
...to minor to avoid injury from alcohol consumption depended upon whether such harm was foreseeable); Christen v. Lee, 113 Wash. 2d 479, 780 P.2d 1307 (1989) (concluding that drinking establishment may be liable for criminal assault by patron, but only if such assault is foreseeable based on ......
-
Serving the "apparently Under the Influence" Patron: the Ramifications of Barrett v. Lucky Seven Saloon, Inc
...Cox v. The Keg Rests. U.S., Inc., 86 Wash. App. 239,248, 935 P.2d 1377, 1382 (1997). 4. Cf. Christen v. Lee, 113 Wash. 2d 479, 503-04, 780 P.2d 1307, 1319 (1989) (holding that vendor serving underage patron who later assaulted patrolman was not negligent per se because prohibition of alcoho......
-
Liability for Prenatal Harm in the Workplace: the Need for Reform
...(emphasis added). 109. Hansen v. Friend, 118 Wash. 2d 476, 479, 824 P.2d 483, 485 (1992). 110. Christen v. Lee, 113 Wash. 2d 479, 492, 780 P.2d 1307, 1313 111. Harbeson, 98 Wash. 2d at 476, 656 P.2d at 493. 112. Wash. Rev. Code § 49.17 (1992). 113. Id. at § 49.17.060 (emphasis added). 114. ......