Seibel v. Leach

• Decision Date: 05 December 1939
• Parties: SEIBEL v. LEACH et al.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

233 Wis. 66

288 N.W. 774

SEIBEL

v.LEACH et al.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Dec. 5, 1939.

Appeal from two orders and judgment of the Circuit Court for Fond du Lac County; C. F. Van Pelt, Judge.

Affirmed.

Action begun November 10, 1938, by Arnold Seibel against Lyle Leach, Joseph Landerman, and St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Company for injuries received in an automobile accident on March 12, 1938. The defendant Leach while intoxicated drove his car against the plaintiff's car. The demurrers of Landerman and the St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Company to the complaint were sustained and judgment of dismissal was for those defendants.

The action is for property damage and personal injuries. The defendant Landerman was a tavern keeper who sold intoxicants to the defendant Leach, and the defendant St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Company is surety on an indemnity bond to secure Landerman's compliance with the tavern licensing laws. From orders sustaining separate demurrers by defendants Landerman and the St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Company to the plaintiff's complaint on the ground it stated no cause of action and from the judgment dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals.

J. E. Richter, of Fond du Lac, for appellant.

Bendinger, Hayes, Kluwin & Schlosser, of Milwaukee, for respondents.

FAIRCHILD, Justice.

[1][2][3] The injury to the plaintiff was the result of an act of the defendant Leach and the responsibility for that act under the law is not visited upon Landerman or his surety. Under the common law it is not an actionable wrong either to sell or to give intoxicating liquors to an able-bodied man. The plaintiff urges the need of some regulation imposing liability on a tavern keeper for injury to a third person resulting from the intoxication of one to whom liquor has been sold. He supports this contention by analogies drawn from the so-called squib case, Scott v. Shepherd, W.B.L. 892, 96 Reprint 525, 3 Wils. 403, 95 Reprint 1124. Our attention is called to many cases in jurisdictions where statutes have been enacted making provision for such liability where one has become intoxicated by illegal sale of liquor. The case of Dunlap v. Wagner, 85 Ind. 529, 44 Am.Rep. 42, is illustrative of the basis of appellant's contention. There a liquor dealer, unlicensed to sell liquor at retail, sold to a customer who consumed the liquor on the premises and became helpless. Because he was too helpless to drive the team which became frightened, a runaway...