ONTD

12:10 am - 08/09/2012

Parents of passenger who died in car crash with Ryan Dunn suing his estate



The parents of the passenger who was also killed in Ryan Dunn's fatal 2011 high speed car crash are suing the "Jackass" star's estate ... claiming Dunn was extremely drunk when he wrecked his Porsche and is responsible for killing their son.

TMZ broke the story ... Dunn had been drinking HEAVILY before he crashed his Porsche into a tree at 132 mph in Pennsylvania in June 2011 ... killing himself and his passenger Zachary Hartwell.

Now, Hartwell's parents have filed a lawsuit against Dunn's estate AND the bar where Dunn had been drinking before the crash ... claiming Barnaby's West Chester was negligent in serving Dunn after he was obviously hammered.

The Hartwells also claim Dunn was reckless and negligent by operating his vehicle while under the influence of alcohol ... and should not have been driving at extremely dangerous speeds.

Zach's parents are suing for unspecified damages ... claiming they've lost the services, guidance, and comfort of their son. And they want Dunn's estate to cover expenses associated with Zach's death ... including funeral costs.

Zach's parents are also suing on behalf of their son's estate ... claiming Dunn and the bar should pay for the "pre-impact fright, fear, pain and suffering" that Zach experienced before he died.

Zach's parents also want both parties to pay for the wages Zach would have earned during his lifetime.

Source: TMZ
pamelalillian 8th-Aug-2012 11:15 pm (UTC)
can you sue for lifetime wages for a child? i get a parent or spouse but...

funeral expenses and prolly pain and suffering or whatever from ryan dunn's estate

idk about the bar tho, not sure how that work
sweet_honesty 8th-Aug-2012 11:19 pm (UTC)
the bar is the best case they have because bars are liable if a patron drinks and drives.
ericasays 8th-Aug-2012 11:22 pm (UTC)
that bar should be in big trouble. i mean, they can't claim he was that drunk when he got there because that means they served a very intoxicated person more alcohol
sweet_honesty 8th-Aug-2012 11:24 pm (UTC)
Exactly.
nin_o_zara 9th-Aug-2012 12:08 am (UTC)
Why are they? If someone is planning on drinking, surely it is their responsibility to make sure they get home safely and legally. People working at a pub have no control over the customers.
sweet_honesty 9th-Aug-2012 12:13 am (UTC)
"Why are they?"

Because that's what happens when you sell something that impair's another person's judgement? Because that's the law?
nin_o_zara 9th-Aug-2012 12:18 am (UTC)
So if he had got the alcohol from an off license or garage, they'd be liable? Or if he had bought anti-allergy tablets from a chemist and then driven and crashed, they'd be liable?

If that is what the law says then fair enough, I'm just trying to understand it.
sweet_honesty 9th-Aug-2012 12:25 am (UTC)
"So if he had got the alcohol from an off license or garage, they'd be liable? "

Do you not watch the news? Of course.

chikntetrazzini 9th-Aug-2012 01:01 am (UTC)
Bars actually can be held liable for drunk drivers. If an employee notices that the person is incredibly drunk and/or is aware the person plans on driving, they have a duty to act.
zibbydoo324 9th-Aug-2012 01:09 am (UTC)
If by "off license or garage" you mean a gas station, grocery store, or liquor store, they are only held responsible if they sell it to him when he is already intoxicated. You cannot further someone's level of intoxication. However, if he came in 3 weeks ago and bought a thousand cases of beer and a 12 bottles of whiskey and consumed it all that night, they are not held responsible. Even if he came in and bought it that day. As long as he was sober when doing so.

Does that clear things up?
sihaya09 9th-Aug-2012 12:27 am (UTC)
It's not like super intoxicated customers can force bars to give them more alcohol. I mean, I hear what you're saying-- personal responsibility is important. And it is. But if the bar kept serving them when they were past a certain intoxication level (and IDK what that is legally, I'm not a lawyer) they can be held partially liable.
nin_o_zara 9th-Aug-2012 12:51 am (UTC)
I know bars have a legal responsibility to cut someone off if they are drunk, and I understand if they continue to serve they might be liable for anything that happens - which I see in this case.

But the consensus here seems to be that bars are responsible for making sure people don't drive after drinking. Which is different, imo.
sihaya09 9th-Aug-2012 12:55 am (UTC)
That can really vary from place to place. Some areas actually have protocols about what to do if a patron has had too much to drink, including calling cabs. So that might be where those perspectives are coming from.
poopanna 9th-Aug-2012 01:43 pm (UTC)
Yes they do.

Even when I worked at a liquor store, if I thought someone was trashed, I didn't have to serve them.
kitsune17 9th-Aug-2012 05:05 pm (UTC)
Most bartenders have to take a TIPS course, which waives liability for the bar, because they are then educated to know when a patron needs to be cut off.

At least on the East Coast.
This page was loaded May 23rd 2013, 12:40 am GMT.