From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 14, 1994
201 A.D.2d 536 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

February 14, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O'Shaughnessy, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with one bill of costs payable by the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs, the motions are granted, and the complaints are dismissed insofar as they are asserted against the appellant.

In order to sustain a claim under the Dram Shop Act, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the appellant vendor unlawfully sold alcoholic beverages to an intoxicated patron (see, General Obligations Law § 11-101). An unlawful sale is defined, in part, as a sale to "[a]ny visibly intoxicated person" (Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65). The Supreme Court erred in denying the motions by the appellant Crabby Joe's, Inc., doing business as Paddy McGee's for summary judgment because there was no evidence presented that Brendan Kelly acted or appeared to be intoxicated at the time that he ordered a bottle of wine with his dinner. Thompson, J.P., O'Brien, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Jones v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 14, 1994
201 A.D.2d 536 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Jones v. Kelly

Case Details

Full title:ARTHUR JONES et al., Respondents, v. BRENDAN KELLY et al., Defendants, and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 14, 1994

Citations

201 A.D.2d 536 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
608 N.Y.S.2d 667

Citing Cases

McGirr v. Zurbrick

That term is defined in Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65" ( Sherman , 80 N.Y.2d at 487, 591 N.Y.S.2d 974,…