Padua v Daly and Trixie's Tavern

Trixie operates a tavern in Columbus, Mythigan. After a bad day at work, Jack Daly stopped at Trixie's Tavern for a few drinks, as he did several times a week.

In less than an hour, Jack consumed three Whiskey Sours. Trixie, the bartender, continued to serve him drinks even after he began stumbling around, slurred his speech, and got unusually and unreasonably angry at the people near him. Finally, Jack pulled his car keys out of his pocket, pushed his glass across the bar to Trixie, and said "One more for the road." Trixie served him, and Jack finished the drink, then stood up, grabbed his car keys, and headed out the door.

Jack got into his car and began his drive home. About six blocks from Trixie's Tavern, Jack failed to stop at a stop sign and hit Raul Padua, a pedestrian, who was crossing the street in a crosswalk. In addition to scrapes and bruises, Padua suffered a concussion and a number of fractures, including a compound fracture of his femur. He was rushed to the hospital for emergency surgery to stabilize his fracture and repair the damage to the adjacent muscles, nerves, and arteries. Padua remained in the hospital for three days for additional surgery. After months of physical therapy, Padua is able to walk, but doctors say he will always have a limp.

Raul Padua has sued Jack Daly and Trixie's Tavern for his injuries. Padua's suit against Jack is premised on negligence, and negligence per se for his failure to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk, as required in the Official Code of Mythigan Annotated: O.C.M.A. 40-6-91 (2020) - Right of way in crosswalks (which is identical to the Georgia dram shop statute)

(a) The driver of a vehicle shall stop and remain stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon the half of the roadway upon which the vehicle is traveling, or when the pedestrian is approaching and is within one lane of the half of the roadway on which the vehicle is traveling or onto which it is turning. For the purposes of this subsection, "half of the roadway" means all traffic lanes carrying traffic in one direction of travel.

Padua bases the lawsuit against Trixie's Tavernon O.C.M.A. 51-1-40 (2020): Liability for acts of intoxicated persons. [Many states have similar statutes, which are commonly called Dram Shop Acts and/or Social Host Liability Acts.]This Mythigan statute, which is also identical to Georgia law, provides

(a) The General Assembly finds and declares that the consumption of alcoholic beverages, rather than the sale or furnishing or serving of such beverages, is the proximate cause of any injury, including death and property damage, inflicted by an intoxicated person upon himself or upon another person, except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this Code section.

(b) A person who sells, furnishes, or serves alcoholic beverages to a person of lawful drinking age shall not thereby become liable for injury, death, or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such person, including injury or death to other persons; provided, however, a person who willfully, knowingly, and unlawfully sells, furnishes, or serves alcoholic beverages to a person who is not of lawful drinking age, knowing that such person will soon be driving a motor vehicle, or who knowingly sells, furnishes, or serves alcoholic beverages to a person who is in a state of noticeable intoxication, knowing that such person will soon be driving a motor vehicle, may become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such minor or person when the sale, furnishing, or serving is the proximate cause of such injury or damage. Nothing contained in this Code section shall authorize the consumer of any alcoholic beverage to recover from the provider of such alcoholic beverage for injuries or damages suffered by the consumer. (emphasis added)

Instructions

Using the FIRAC model, analyze Padua's claims againstboth Jack Daly and Trixie's Tavern.

• Even though you have two defendants, combine your analysis into a single paper, with only one statement of Facts, Issue, Rules, Application, and Conclusion.
• Thus, your issue statement should address the potential liability of both Jack and the tavern.
• Your rule statementshould identify and fully explain the four pertinent legal rules: negligence, negligence per se, and the two statutes in the scenario.
• Similarly, your application section should apply the pertinent legal rules first to the facts that may/may not impose liability on Jack for Padua's injuries and then apply the rules pertinent to Padua's claim against the tavern to the facts that may/may not impose liability on it.
• Finally, try to craft a conclusion that in 1-2 sentences states your conclusion as to whether Jack, Trixie's Tavern, or both defendants can be held liable, briefly explaining why.

Extra-Credit Option

Holly Davenport, one of Jack Daly's coworkers, invited Jack and her other colleagues to a barbecue at her house after work to celebrate the completion of a major project for one of the firm's best clients.

Suppose that instead of going to the tavern after work, Jack stopped by Holly's home to attend the barbecue. Instead of having an open bar, Holly served as the bartender for her guests. She served Jack three Whiskey Sours within an hour after his arrival. Jack became noticeably intoxicated and interacted in a belligerent manner with another guest, who suggested that Jack stop drinking and go home. Jack replied, "Don't worry; I'll be leaving soon." Holding his car keys, he turned to Holly and asked her for "one more for the road." Against her better judgment, Hollyserved him another drink. After finishing his drink, Jack stood up, grabbed his car keys, and headed out the door.

As in the scenario above, Jack got into his car to drive home. About a mile from Holly's, he failed to stop at a stop sign and hit Raul Padua in the crosswalk, causing the injuries above.Padua has sued both Jack Daly and Holly Davenport.

please do both parts a detailed