Tiger Woods sued

[Richd]

Those (if true) are pretty damning, and certainly take this beyond a "cash grab".

I wasn't sure if FL had similar laws to ours, and they don't. They only hold servers responsible in two scenarios (I got this of something called legalmatch.com)

Florida businesses are held liable under two exceptions to this rule, which involve:

1. The sale of alcohol to a minor: Bars and taverns will be held strictly liable for injuries caused by the tender of alcohol to a person who is under 21 years of age. “Strictly liable” means that the employee need not have any knowledge that the person was a minor at the time of they sold the alcoholic beverage to be held accountable.
2. The sale of alcohol to a person who is known to be “habitually addicted” to alcohol:Similarly, establishments will be held liable if they serve alcohol to a person who is known to have a history of addiction to alcohol. Courts have held that such persons create a “foreseeable risk of injury” because they lack the capability to make responsible decisions regarding drinking.

So that doesn't bode well for Tiger or his girlfriend.

Since the issue of accountability has come up, shouldn't Tiger be accountable for breaking the law here?

and the business can be held liable it is a stretch to get to personal liability of the owner (specially given the complex corporate structure i'm pretty sure would be in place)

[Richd]

It will start with this:

"The Liquor Control Act prohibits an alcoholic liquor permittees or their employees from providing alcohol to intoxicated persons (CGS § 30-86(b)(1)). Violations are punishable by up to a $1,000 fine, up to one year imprisonment, or both, for each offense (CGS § 30-113).J"

Then causing death added down the road so to speak.

wonder who the permittee would be in the case of the woods restaurant

[Pimento Cheese]

and the business can be held liable it is a stretch to get to personal liability of the owner (specially given the complex corporate structure i'm pretty sure would be in place)

I think Tiger's personal liability comes in if they're able to prove the claim that Tiger was drinking with the guy on the premises a couple of nights earlier and knew he was an alcoholic.

[4underthru9]

wonder who the permittee would be in the case of the woods restaurant

Need to check the specific ownership.
As the permittee is the person to whom the permit to sell liquor has been issued to. In most countries that is the owner and that permit has to be displayed in plain sight inside the establishment. I say most countries, from having owned one bar and managed another in Europe.

[Big Shooter]

Great food and decent prices at that restaurant when we ate there....and lots of nice cars!

[Richd]

Need to check the specific ownership.
As the permittee is the person to whom the permit to sell liquor has been issued to. In most countries that is the owner and that permit has to be displayed in plain sight inside the establishment. I say most countries, from having owned one bar and managed another in Europe.

TGR ventures?

[Fern]

The allegations into the personal liability of Tiger Woods in the lawsuit might be only a strategy to try to force a settlement, by playing the public opinion.

Just to give a real life example of lawsuit absurdities, a friend of mine hired a roofing company to come and fix his roof. The owner of the company went up the roof, along with a few employees, fell to the ground, almost died and is now invalid for work. The guy is now suing my friend for damages.

How absurd is it? He presented himself as an "experienced professional" whose job was exactly to fix said roof (so he knew about the roof issues) and was not wearing the safety harness. My take is that he didn't have insurance and is trying to see if he can get anything, via a settlement, from my friend.

[mpare]

What I don't understand is the legal basis for Tiger Woods being sued personally. A copy of the pleadings would explain that. In their absence, we're left to wonder how Tiger is responsible, since the sale of the liquor to the deceased was effected by the owner of the restaurant, which I would assume is not Tiger Woods, but a company which he presumably controls. If that's so, the it is the corporation and its implicated employee or employees who may be responsible, not Tiger.

[wlorcb]

Ah yes, the legal absurdity of the Limited Liability Corporation

[4underthru9]

Well he does own it and is fully involved with its day to day operation.

The Woods, Jupiter Florida.

[mpare]

It's no surprise that he's there, but do you know for certain that the owner and operator of the restaurant is not a corporation? If it is, that corporation is a distinct and separate legal entity from Tiger Woods the individual, even if is Tiger's company. As such, legal liability would fall to the company, not Tiger.

Well he does own it and is fully involved with its day to day operation.

The Woods, Jupiter Florida.

[mpare]

Its hardly an absurdity. The utility of corporations as distinct and separate legal entities has been recognized for a very long time.

Ah yes, the legal absurdity of the Limited Liability Corporation

[Pimento Cheese]

It's no surprise that he's there, but do you know for certain that the owner and operator of the restaurant is not a corporation? If it is, that corporation is a distinct and separate legal entity from Tiger Woods the individual, even if is Tiger's company. As such, legal liability would fall to the company, not Tiger.

According to this SI article from last year, Woods owns it outright, and spends a good deal of time there. (Also, FWIW, his girlfriend is the general manager.)

https://www.si.com/golf/2018/06/12/tiger-woods-restaurant-woods-jupiter-florida

[mpare]

That would explain it, then. The restaurant owners that I have known all had there businesses owned by corporations for tax and liability reasons. The situation in Florida must be different.

According to this SI article from last year, Woods owns it outright, and spends a good deal of time there. (Also, FWIW, his girlfriend is the general manager.)

https://www.si.com/golf/2018/06/12/t...upiter-florida

[4underthru9]

Its hardly an absurdity. The utility of corporations as distinct and separate legal entities has been recognized for a very long time.

Slightly different note but I don't think one can state that ^^^ in general terms.
What about Westray Law in cases of work place injuries and deaths?