MADD COORDINATOR LAUDS BAR-SUIT RULING

A Missouri Supreme Court ruling that makes it easier for people injured by drunken drivers to sue the bar or restaurant where the driver got his alcohol makes sense, says a local MADD coordinator.

"It's about time we had changes in laws that benefit the victims," said Bettie Knoll, Cape Girardeau coordinator for Mothers Against Drunk Driving, coordinator of victim services for Cape Girardeau County and victim advocate for the Cape Girardeau Police Department.

The decision handed down by the court on Wednesday dismissed a state law that allowed drunken-driving victims to sue the bar or restaurant where the driver got his alcohol only if the owner of the liquor establishment had first been convicted of a misdemeanor for serving an intoxicated person. The court said the Legislature can not set up "arbitrary or unreasonable barriers" to the courts.

"The ruling did not change the fact that it is against the law to serve someone who is intoxicated," said Jeff Maguire, a lawyer with the law firm of Thomasson, Gilbert, Cook and Maguire in Cape Girardeau. What it changed was the victim's right to sue, whether or not the prosecutor successfully brought charges against the owner of the liquor establishments for breaking that law.

Maguire said he wasn't surprised that the law was challenged since it is rare for a law to require a conviction before a suit can be filed.

"If you have an automobile accident because someone ran a red light, you don't have to prove that person got a ticket in order to sue him," Maguire said.

He said he agreed with the court that the way the law was written set arbitrary barriers.

"You could have the exact same set of circumstances, and the prosecutor in one county might decide to prosecute the owner while the prosecutor in the next might not," Maguire said.

He doesn't see the ruling spawning a flood of lawsuits, although the fact that it makes it easier to sue may increase the number of suits brought.

"It probably will mean some more lawsuits and perhaps more well-deserved lawsuits since it applies to taverns that serve obviously intoxicated people," Maguire said.

A number of bars and restaurants that serve liquor were called for this story, and few owners and managers would comment on the Supreme Court ruling. Those that did said they have in place policies that forbid serving patrons who are intoxicated.

James Allen, owner of Celebrations, said his restaurant has such a policy, and he keeps it in writing to remind employees.

BG's Old Tyme Deli and Saloon also has such a policy. BG's owner, Gary Helwege, issued a statement that he doesn't think establishments should be held liable for accidents that happen off premises. "We don't make people drink or make them get in the car and drive," Helwege said.

Knoll said she understands the business side of the issue, but she hopes the Supreme Court ruling will reinforce to liquor establishments the importance of not allowing people to become intoxicated.

"Maybe lawsuits will make people open their eyes to how serious this can be," Knoll said.