Quote :

"ST. LOUIS -- The father of the late St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Josh Hancock has filed a lawsuit, claiming that a popular restaurant continued to provide drinks to the reliever even though he was clearly intoxicated before the drunk-driving crash that killed him. The lawsuit brought by Dean Hancock names Mike Shannon's Restaurant, which is owned by the long-time Cardinals broadcaster. It also names Shannon's daughter, who's the restaurant manager. Police say Hancock was drunk, speeding and using a cell phone when his SUV struck the back of a tow truck in the early hours of April 29. Also named in the lawsuit are the tow truck company and driver and the driver of the car who was getting help from the tow truck on Interstate 64. "

It sucks he died, but damn man, your son had a little too much to drink and wasn't responsible enough to call a cab or get someone to drive for him. Its not the restaurants fault. Its your sons fault. And what the fuck is up with suing the fucking tow truck company that YOUR SON RAN INTO?

[Edited on May 24, 2007 at 3:17 PM. Reason : .]

5/24/2007 3:16:40 PM

Quote :

"and the driver of the car who was getting help from the tow truck on Interstate 64."

How dare someone break down on the interstate.

5/24/2007 3:19:53 PM

wtf? I hope this gets dismissed and he gets laughed out of any courtroom.

5/24/2007 3:22:57 PM

I can maybe understand suing the tow truck company if the truck was parked improperly or something on the side of the road, but what the hell is the point of suing the person that was getting helped by the tow truck. If anything, these people should be suing Hancocks estate for him running into them...while he was drunk.

5/24/2007 3:24:58 PM

seriously, if i was the motorist getting help, i'd sue the ever living shit out of the hancock estate.

5/24/2007 3:28:41 PM

sucks he died, but damn he makes a lot more money than most people make. I think he could afforded a cab. He was an adult, he made a choice...unfortunately it was a decision that cost him his life.

5/24/2007 3:49:19 PM

Quote :

"but what the hell is the point of suing the person that was getting helped by the tow truck."

Remember, this is a country where people can spill "hot" coffee on them and get money out of it. Typical if you ask me, pointing the finger at everyone except the real culprit. Until these things get laughed out of court, they'll continue.

5/24/2007 3:51:45 PM

my favorite is the one where a woman sued a restaurant and won because she threw a wine bottle at her husband because he had informed her that he'd been cheating on her, she later slipped on the wine as she tried to run out of the restaurant...i agree shit like that is just plain dumb

5/24/2007 3:57:00 PM

did the restaurant also provide him with his cellphone and weed?

5/24/2007 3:58:07 PM

that would be a popular restaurant if they did

5/24/2007 4:07:32 PM

It also says more people are to be added as defendents. They are suing the guy whose car broke down because he was "negligent in allowing the vehicle to reach the point where it stalled on the highway, and for failing to move it out of the way of oncoming traffic."

People wonder why kids are so messed up these days. They aren't held accountable for anything in life and it's always someone else's fault, even though he made the decision to drink, drink enough to get drunk, get behind the wheel, not buckle, and talk on the cell phone, and not pay attention to what he was doing. I would also sue his estate for damages.

[Edited on May 24, 2007 at 4:47 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on May 24, 2007 at 4:47 PM. Reason : .]

5/24/2007 4:45:11 PM

the restaurant can be sued and should be....... but i hope this guy loses because he is suing everyone who is also a victim

i threw up reading this thread

5/24/2007 5:21:52 PM

I think not wearing a seatbelt is probably the whammy that killed him.

5/24/2007 5:21:59 PM

his family obviously needs more money

5/24/2007 5:28:30 PM

wow i just heard this. sounds like a long line of high quality people in this family

5/24/2007 7:10:05 PM

it's not the restaurant's fault he was a dumbass. thats the exact same thing as fat people suing mcdonalds. it's their decision to consume that much and they need to live w/ the consequences of their choices. the manager is not the school teacher in a nursery, she shouldn't be responsible for babysitting every customer that walks in the door. an adult made a bad decision.

it sucks that he died, but that's what happens when you make terrible decisions. people get hurt.

5/24/2007 7:30:27 PM

Unfortunately restaurants can be held liable for allowing someone who is noticeably drunk to continue drinking and allowing an intoxicated person to leave the restaurant. If the staff of the restaurant doesn't do everything in their power to get the person some form of transportation, precedent allows for the restaurant and manager on duty to be sued. Fucked up, but it happens.

5/24/2007 8:13:18 PM

this shit's crazy

5/24/2007 8:16:59 PM

Does any one remember what he blew? Perhaps he wasn't visibly wasted, or was just barely over the limit.

5/24/2007 8:20:40 PM

are u a dumbass?? he didnt blow anything...the fucker was dead...

5/24/2007 8:34:05 PM

^

5/24/2007 8:34:57 PM

Well what I mean was, what was his blood alcohol level. Its just a habit to ask what they blew when wanting to know this.

5/24/2007 8:36:46 PM

the autopsy showed he was about double the limit, so i'd guess about a .16

5/24/2007 8:37:23 PM

.16 is a shitload, but for a big man like Hancock he probably wasnt falling over wasted.....no way its the restaurants fault IMO

5/24/2007 8:49:15 PM

but .16 means 1.6 grams of alcohol for every 1000 grams of blood

so its a percentage, not a definite amount

ie a smaller person with the same amount of alcohol could have a higher BAC than .16

5/24/2007 8:52:34 PM

Quote :

"It sucks he died, but damn man, your son had a little too much to drink and wasn't responsible enough to call a cab or get someone to drive for him. Its not the restaurants fault. Its your sons fault. And what the fuck is up with suing the fucking tow truck company that YOUR SON RAN INTO?"

5/24/2007 8:55:09 PM

this is almost comedy

5/25/2007 12:31:07 AM

I LOLed

5/25/2007 2:42:00 AM

Quote :

"Its not the restaurants fault."

not necessarily the restaurant's fault, but they are definitely responsible.



what about a few years ago when the dude plowed into a bunch of Good Samaritans near the Nowell Rd/NC-54 intersection after the State-UVa football game? should Pure Gold not have been held liable for serving the driver of the van?

or am I talking apples to oranges?

5/25/2007 8:26:23 AM

Quote :

"should Pure Gold not have been held liable for serving the driver of the van? "

yes, they should not have been held liable

5/25/2007 8:28:44 AM

how so?

5/25/2007 8:42:24 AM

cause they are, one of those "is what it is" things

just like if you have a house party and allow someone to drive home after you got them drunk, they crash and kill themselves/someone else, you could legally be held responsible

5/25/2007 8:49:03 AM

dram shop baby

and there probably is a counterclaim, or will be, against Hancock regarding the stranded motorist and tow truck. definitely the stranded motorist, but as someone mentioned above if the tow truck was improperly parked there's a possibility of a claim there.

[Edited on May 25, 2007 at 9:04 AM. Reason : ]

5/25/2007 9:01:35 AM

^^idk see i think thats an apples and oranges thing

in one case there is a business establishment....you sell alcohol...thats your business...the other is a party...either way i think its the person that drives drunk fault....i dont think you should punish people for some drunk idiot driving when he shouldnt

5/25/2007 9:13:06 AM

Quote :

"They aren't held accountable for anything in life and it's always someone else's fault"

This is damn ironic coming from TWW

5/25/2007 9:27:09 AM

just saw this post that i also agreed with so i'll quote it

Quote :

"it's not the restaurant's fault he was a dumbass. thats the exact same thing as fat people suing mcdonalds. it's their decision to consume that much and they need to live w/ the consequences of their choices. the manager is not the school teacher in a nursery, she shouldn't be responsible for babysitting every customer that walks in the door. an adult made a bad decision. it sucks that he died, but that's what happens when you make terrible decisions. people get hurt. "

5/25/2007 9:29:55 AM

i hate lawyers

5/25/2007 9:33:15 AM

^ i've grown to hate that statement seeing as I got one in the family now. I dont get why people hate lawyers, hate the people that hire them and suing everyone. Like I don't think prostitutes are nasty, but I think the dudes that buy em are lame as fuck.

DONT HATE THE PLAYER, HATE THE GAME

Quote :

"in one case there is a business establishment....you sell alcohol...thats your business...the other is a party...either way i think its the person that drives drunk fault....i dont think you should punish people for some drunk idiot driving when he shouldnt"

either way someone is providing the other with the catalyst that *possibly* caused the accident, who knows they could be a good drunk driver and just wanted to switch the radio from My Humps or something

even still.

[Edited on May 25, 2007 at 9:40 AM. Reason : .]

5/25/2007 9:38:57 AM

meh

5/25/2007 9:52:49 AM

Quote :

"^ i've grown to hate that statement seeing as I got one in the family now. I dont get why people hate lawyers, hate the people that hire them and suing everyone. Like I don't think prostitutes are nasty, but I think the dudes that buy em are lame as fuck."

lawyers could always not take stupid cases.

I wonder what would have happened if the driver of the tow truck or the driver of the car that stalled were injured or killed because dumbass didn't pay attention to what he was doing?

5/25/2007 9:53:06 AM

As I said a few posts up, they probably will, if not already, file a counterclaim.

[Edited on May 25, 2007 at 10:30 AM. Reason : ]

5/25/2007 10:30:04 AM

It is the restuarants responsibility to cut you off if you have been drinking too much, and it is their responsibility to get you a ride home, if they have served you too much. It's not their fault, but they are responsible. This is not atypical, drunk drivers (or the estates of) sue establishments all the time, and they do this because they are being sue by the victims of their actions. Essentially, the victims sue the driver, the driver (or estate of) sues the restuarant to offset the costs of the first law suit.

[Edited on May 25, 2007 at 12:37 PM. Reason : BAC .157 via Wiki]

5/25/2007 12:35:27 PM

i'd countersue the parents for giving hancock their genes which obviously happened before he was served alcohol by the bar

anybody else get the feeling that his parents were using their son's MLB pitching as a meal ticket and now that its gone they're trying one last ditch effort to get some millions?

5/25/2007 12:40:42 PM

I'd go and pee on this guy's grave and show that video at the trial. Then I'd say, "Suck it" and do the DX chop.

5/25/2007 1:23:02 PM

so can the towing company sue this guys father for his son hitting the tow truck?

if this guy can sue the towing company i think the towing company should be able to sue them for damages

5/25/2007 1:30:51 PM

There's an old saying in law to the gist of "In law the only thing certain are the fees".

5/25/2007 1:36:17 PM

Quote :

"Then I'd say, "Suck it" and do the DX chop."

haha

i loved doing that in my younger days

i wish i could do it in the workplace at times

5/25/2007 1:38:39 PM