Woods’ wrongful death case: When are bars responsible?
Palm Beach County As golf legend Tiger Woods now contends with a new wrongful death lawsuit surrounding his restaurant, there’s a big question: Who’s at fault when a bar serves drinks to someone who dies in a crash?
Is it the bartender? Is it the bar or restaurant? What about blaming it on the person who drank too much?
Experts say Florida laws clearly define how the courts must handle cases like the one just slapped on the 2019 Masters champion, his namesake business in Jupiter, and his girlfriend, Erica Herman, who runs the place.
The parents of Nicholas Immesberger, who died at age 24 in a December car crash, told reporters Tuesday they are hopeful a jury one day will hold Woods responsible.
Woods, who just last week became a Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient, acknowledged the litigation during his own news conference ahead of the PGA Championship in Farmingdale, N.Y.
“We’re all very sad that Nick passed away,” Woods said. “It was a terrible night, a terrible ending. And we feel bad for him
and his entire family. It’s very sad.”
Is Woods in legal jeopardy?
In the old days, it was cut and dry: You could never sue a bar. This was based on the principle under common law that the liability was squarely on the person drinking the alcohol — not the place selling it.
Yet over the past halfcentury or so, state lawmakers began allowing some key exceptions.
First, there was a landmark 1963 Florida Supreme Court decision that allowed civil lawsuits concerning alcohol sales to minors. Then in 1980, the state Legislature passed a law that lets people sue businesses for serving anyone addicted to alcohol who winds up hurt or dead.
So while bars are protected from most wrongful death lawsuits, Immesberger’s family and their attorneys believe the law is on their side.
They say Immesberger, who worked as a bartender at The Woods Jupiter restaurant, suffered from alcoholism that his co-workers knew all about.
The lawsuit claims that on Dec. 10, Immesberger drank at the bar for three hours after finishing a shift, and then got behind the wheel of a 1999 Chevy Corvette.
While driving north on Federal Highway in Martin County, he lost control of the car, crashed and was killed.
Immesberger had a blood-alcohol level of .256, or more than three times the 0.08 legal limit to drive, according to personal injury attorneys Craig Goldenfarb and Spencer Kuvin.
They contend The Woods carelessly ignored Immesberger’s drinking problem and “fueled it by over-serving him alcohol to the point of severe intoxication and then sending him out to his car to drive home.”
Mary Katherine Belowsky, Immesberger’s mother, said she believes the establishment “failed” her son.
“They served him until he couldn’t walk,” she said.
Civil attorney Matthew Schwenke of West Palm Beach, who has represented victims’ families in claims against bars, said there are a few steps before such a lawsuit can get before a jury.
There has to be clear proof about the person’s drinking history, and that the bar was fully aware of it.
“A plaintiff in this situation needs to prove that the person who became inebriated was habitually addicted to alcohol,” said Schwenke, who is not connected to the Woods case. This can involve gathering a person’s bar tabs over time, through credit card statements. Also:
“Did the bartenders or the owners know the person?” Schwenke said. “Did they know his drink of choice? You know, was he Norm from Cheers? Facts like that.”
Personal injury lawyer Laurence M. Krutchik, of Miami, said Woods’ side would likely lean on a state law called the “alcohol or drug defense,” if a judge allows the case to go to trial.
This law restricts damage payouts if the jury makes two findings. First, the jury must determine that the blood-alcohol level of the person suing the bar was above the legal limit. Then, there must be a determination that “the plaintiff was more than 50 percent at fault” in the case.
Krutchik said if that happens, the person suing the bar “gets nothing.”
“That’s going to be the real battleground in that case,” he said.
Kuvin, co-counsel for Immesberger’s estate, also made an allegation that The Woods has intentionally deleted video surveillance footage of Immesberger drinking on the afternoon before he died.
“We have, through our investigation, uncovered evidence to show the bar knew what happened, they knew about the crash that night, and shortly thereafter that video evidence was then destroyed and deleted off the servers they have at The Woods,” Kuvin said.
Attorneys for Tiger Woods have not yet filed any response to the lawsuit.
Belowsky, Immesberger’s mom, told reporters that she would like for the case to put every bar or restaurant that serves beer and liquor on notice.
“I’m hoping that the restaurants and the bars take note and realize when someone is impaired and they can’t drive, so it doesn’t happen to someone else,” she said. “It’s a tragedy.”