Vandenburg v. Brosnan
| Decision Date | 27 April 1987 |
| Citation | 129 A.D.2d 793,514 N.Y.S.2d 784 |
| Parties | Richard VANDENBURG, Appellant, v. Timothy BROSNAN, et al., Defendants, Southland Corp. d/b/a Seven-Eleven, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Nathan B. Kogan, New York City (Irving N. Selkin and Morris Honig, of counsel), for appellant.
Lawler & Caulfield, New York City (David S. Heller, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BROWN, J.P., and NIEHOFF, SULLIVAN and HARWOOD, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), dated March 13, 1986, which granted the corporate defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
This action arises out of a one car accident during which the plaintiff sustained serious injuries while a passenger in an automobile driven by the minor defendant Anthony Fazio after both parties had consumed beer which the plaintiff allegedly bought from the corporate defendant.
Given the fact that the plaintiff procured the alcoholic beverage for the person whose intoxication allegedly caused the accident, he has no cognizable cause of action predicated upon a violation of the Dram Shop Act (see, General Obligations Law § 11-101; Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65; see, Harris v. Hurlburt, 83 Misc.2d 626, 629, 373 N.Y.S.2d 480; cf. Mitchell v. The Shoals, Inc., 19 N.Y.2d 338, 280 N.Y.S.2d 113, 227 N.E.2d 21).
We also find that the plaintiff has no viable cause of action against the corporate defendant predicated upon common-law negligence. Our courts have generally declined to impose liability upon dispensers of alcoholic beverages for the injuries of voluntarily intoxicated customers on the ground that the dispenser owes no duty to protect the consumer from the results of the latter's voluntary intoxication (see, Reuter v. Flobo Enters. Ltd, 120 A.D.2d 722, 503 N.Y.S.2d 67; Allen v. County of Westchester, 109 A.D.2d 475, 492 N.Y.S.2d 772, appeal dismissed 66 N.Y.2d 915, 498 N.Y.S.2d 1027, 489 N.E.2d 773; Vadasy v. Feigel's Tavern, 88 Misc.2d 614, 391 N.Y.S.2d 32, affd. 55 A.D.2d 1011, 391 N.Y.S.2d 999, lv. denied 42 N.Y.2d 805, 398 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 367 N.E.2d 659; cf. Wilkins v. Weresiuk, 64 Misc.2d 736, 316 N.Y.S.2d 360). Thus, there appears to be no rational basis for holding a dispenser of alcoholic beverages liable where the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
O'Rourke v. Chew
...upon a violation of the Dram Shop Act ( seeGeneral Obligations Law § 11–101; Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65; Vandenburg v. Brosnan, 129 A.D.2d 793, 514 N.Y.S.2d 784 [2d Dept 1987], affd70 N.Y.2d 940, 524 N.Y.S.2d 672 [1988] ). In addition, General Obligations Law §§ 11–101 and 11–100 d......
-
Robbins v. McCarthy
...Suchorski (1964), 372 Mich. 396, 126 N.W.2d 803; Plamondon v. Matthews (1985), 148 Mich.App. 737, 385 N.W.2d 273; Vandenburg v. Brosnan (1987), 129 A.D.2d 793, 514 N.Y.S.2d 784, appeal granted by (1987), 70 N.Y.2d 603, 518 N.Y.S.2d 1025, 512 N.E.2d 551, order affirmed by 70 N.Y.2d 940, 524 ......
-
Cox v. Rolling Acres Golf Course Corp., 94-573
...& Jayes Valley Restaurant & Cafe, Inc., 582 N.Y.S.2d 544, 545, 182 A.D.2d 981, 982 (App.Div.1992); Vandenburg v. Brosnan, 514 N.Y.S.2d 784, 784-85, 129 A.D.2d 793, 793-94 (App.Div.1987), aff'd, 70 N.Y.2d 940, 524 N.Y.S.2d 672, 519 N.E.2d 618 (1988). The rationale supporting this defense is ......
-
Dodge v. Victory Markets Inc.
...Cafe, 182 A.D.2d 981, 582 N.Y.S.2d 544; Powers v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 129 A.D.2d 37, 41, 516 N.Y.S.2d 811; Vandenburg v. Brosnan, 129 A.D.2d 793, 794, 514 N.Y.S.2d 784; affd. 70 N.Y.2d 940, 524 N.Y.S.2d 672, 519 N.E.2d 618). The term procure has been interpreted to include persons s......