SC woman sues bar for not checking her ID

  • Follow Latest News

BLUFFTON, S.C. — A woman is suing a Bluffton bar because a bartender didn’t check her age before serving her on the night of the 2009 wreck that paralyzed her.

The Beaufort Gazette reports that Chelsea Hess, who was then 20 years old, is a paraplegic because of the accident.

Hess’ lawsuit in 14th Circuit Court says she was served at Jock’s Sports Grill, but the bartender failed to check her ID or to determine if she was already drunk.

She’s also suing the state Department of Transportation, saying the agency failed to properly maintain the shoulder of the road where her car crashed.

Both the company that owns the bar and the DOT denied Hess’ claims in court papers.

Lawyers for both say Hess is responsible for her accident.

Comments (23) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
corgimom
38314
Points
corgimom 12/27/11 - 07:34 am
0
0
"I made a series of terrible

"I made a series of terrible choices and now I'm all messed up, but I'm going to blame someone else for my wrongdoing."

This is disgusting. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

nothin2show4it
120
Points
nothin2show4it 12/27/11 - 07:49 am
0
0
Her lawyer should be
Unpublished

Her lawyer should be disbarred for taking the case. That is just insane.

The epitome of not taking responsibility for ones own actions.

RoadkiII
6807
Points
RoadkiII 12/27/11 - 08:11 am
0
0
"It's not my fault" Come on

"It's not my fault" Come on people, if you screw up, 'fess up.

Little Lamb
48949
Points
Little Lamb 12/27/11 - 08:18 am
0
0
The McDonalds hot coffee case

The McDonalds hot coffee case is a precedent.

stillamazed
1488
Points
stillamazed 12/27/11 - 08:18 am
0
0
Money grubbing attorneys at

Money grubbing attorneys at their best......she is responsible for what she did and if she went in a bar and got plastered she probably showed a fake ID. I am 51 and I am always carded when I go into a bar. Take responsibility for yourself girlie, no one made you to go in a bar, get drunk and ruin your life. You did that on your own.

David Parker
7923
Points
David Parker 12/27/11 - 09:33 am
0
0
yes, yes, and yes. She

yes, yes, and yes. She should be responsible. But if the DOT did not maintain road / shoulder integrity, they should be called out on that. IN NO WAY, should they pay the girl that wrecked. Just fix the problem.

rdbike
68
Points
rdbike 12/27/11 - 09:39 am
0
0
She will probably win! Either

She will probably win! Either in court or more likely an out of court settlement.

itsanotherday
0
Points
itsanotherday 12/27/11 - 09:43 am
0
0
Mark my words, she will win.
Unpublished

Mark my words, she will win. They will get together 12 of the most simple minded "somebody gotta pay" people they can find.

drivenslow
0
Points
drivenslow 12/27/11 - 09:44 am
0
0
i dont see this going very
Unpublished

i dont see this going very far she was already breaking the law...kinda hard to sue someone when you were breaking the law twice underage drinking then driving drunk....she got what she was just asking for why not sue the liquor company too

fatboyhog
2104
Points
fatboyhog 12/27/11 - 09:59 am
0
0
Yep. No personal

Yep. No personal responsibility. If she was carded and refused service, she'd have gone elsewhere. It was HER intent to drink. She KNEW she wasn't old enough. I am getting tired of people blaming their stupidity on others. Too bad I can't be on that jury.

Piperpig
9
Points
Piperpig 12/27/11 - 10:13 am
0
0
It is a loser. No dram shop

It is a loser. No dram shop liability in SC for the drunk driver.

allhans
24861
Points
allhans 12/27/11 - 10:16 am
0
0
The shoulder of the road is

The shoulder of the road is not meant to be a driving lane.

Little Lamb
48949
Points
Little Lamb 12/27/11 - 10:43 am
0
0
Right, allhans, but we need

Right, allhans, but we need good shoulders to accomodate all the weaving.

Little Lamb
48949
Points
Little Lamb 12/27/11 - 10:45 am
0
0
Yeah, but Piperpig, some

Yeah, but Piperpig, some lawyer will be testing the constitutionality of the dram shop liability thing just as they tested the new S.C. illegal alien law and the state came up short.

fftaz71
108
Points
fftaz71 12/27/11 - 10:50 am
0
0
None of us would ever make

None of us would ever make the jury b/c we all blame the one and only person responsible for her predicament...her. Lawyers would pre-empt us right off the bat if it went to a jury trial. Im sorry she has the problems she has because her life will be difficult forever and it is a terrible price to pay, but sometimes when you play games the "it cant happen to me" thing is the end result. At least shes still alive....and hopefully nobody else got hurt because of her stupidity.

Lawpig
0
Points
Lawpig 12/27/11 - 11:20 am
0
0
Little Lamb: the immigration

Little Lamb: the immigration law was struck down on issues related to preemption. Dram Shop liability is a creation of state common law and directly related to the end of prohibition and fears that the roads would be full of drunks hurting innocent people. It's made to protect innocent drivers--not the drunks. A drunk driver cannot sue a dram shop for injuries they sustain in a wreck. Now, I understand this girl is underaged. Maybe if she were like fifteen or something this might be a case that would make it to a jury. But she's an adult. It's got contributory negligence written all over it and it'll probably get dismissed.

Fftaz71: lawyers do not preempt anyone or anything. I just don't get why people hate lawyers so much.

stillamazed
1488
Points
stillamazed 12/27/11 - 11:46 am
0
0
I agree with some that she

I agree with some that she may win, that is because we live in a society where so many are trying to get something for nothing to start with so if it goes to a jury who has that type of mentality then she will win.

my.voice
5166
Points
my.voice 12/27/11 - 02:01 pm
0
0
This is a reflection of a

This is a reflection of a generation.

That said, notice the "drunk n drown" photo gallery from the AC Spotted section. Wait, that's a reflection also!

GaStang22
910
Points
GaStang22 12/27/11 - 02:39 pm
0
0
This bar should only have the
Unpublished

This bar should only have the normal fines and punishment of breaking the law and that is it. Where is her culpability in all this, instead of being thankful her irresponsibility didnt kill any innocent people, she wants a payday for her own criminal deeds.

Isn't there a clean hands law that this should fall under??? Hello??? Wouldnt a laywer know this? This lawyer is just going to take what little money she has probably!!! lol If you cant collect from your drug dealer when breaking the law you shouldnt be able to collect from a bar when you are breaking the law!! Oh let me guess there is a loop hole for poor wittle irresponsible criminals!!

It makes me sick this country has turned into one that we blame everyone else or rely on everyone else instead of taking responsibility for our own actions and care.

rmwhitley
5547
Points
rmwhitley 12/27/11 - 02:39 pm
0
0
Enforce ID's at bars but
Unpublished

Enforce ID's at bars but don't fret over illegal voters without valid IDs. Sounds like democrats to me.

saltine
281
Points
saltine 12/27/11 - 08:53 pm
0
0
her parents and family

her parents and family ,should be so proud!

eagle
94
Points
eagle 12/27/11 - 11:27 pm
0
0
Personal responsibility??
Unpublished

Personal responsibility?? You're kidding. The country's new motto...it isn't my fault!

Asitisinaug
3
Points
Asitisinaug 12/28/11 - 02:37 am
0
0
First and foremost, anyone

First and foremost, anyone over the age of 18 should be fully responsible for their own actions and ALL of these frivolous lawsuits should be done away with. However, as long as we continue to elect lawyers as legislatures and place them in positions such as judges, very little will change. The only reason many of these law suits are even filed is because of shady lawyers that know their case is wrong but that insurance companies will pay out in a settlement vs. what they believe it would cost to pay attorney fees. If the courts would at least mandate that the attorney taking the case will pay ALL fees if the case is not won, many would stop taking ridiculous cases and insurance companies would stop issuing settlements when they know they will win the case.

There are no dram shop laws in SC and therefore, the bar will not be held liable in a civil case. Nor should they because it could easily be proven that since this person worked in the food and beverage industry she was fully aware of the face that she herself was breaking the law by ordering the alcohol. Furthermore, since she was committing a criminal act during this incident, it will make it easy to have the suit dismissed in summary judgment.

As for the state DOT, good luck with that one. It would cost major bucks to prove that the roadway was a danger, etc. and no attorney is going to put forth that much money unless they know they are going to win a big pay day.

Basically, they have filed a frivolous law suit in hopes that someone will give them something, the lawyer will take 40% for little to no work and then they will move on to the next case. If they don't get anything, it is no sweat off of the attorneys back other than a simple filing.

We need to make it much more difficult to file frivolous law suits in this country. They are a huge waste to our court systems time and waste a lot of taxpayer funded money that could be better spent elsewhere such as keeping violent criminals behind bars.

firstamendment23
0
Points
firstamendment23 12/28/11 - 08:03 am
0
0
Your choice, your right, your

Your choice, your right, your stupidity - Case dismissed !!

Little Lamb
48949
Points
Little Lamb 12/28/11 - 08:10 am
0
0
Asitisinaug wrote, “. . .

Asitisinaug wrote, “. . . she herself was breaking the law by ordering the alcohol.”

I hope some lawyers chime in here, because I thought it was against the law to sell alcohol to someone under 21, but not against the law for someone under 21 to buy it. Am I wrong?

harley_52
25812
Points
harley_52 12/28/11 - 09:47 am
0
0
Little Lamb, I'm no lawyer,

Little Lamb, I'm no lawyer, but I think you are half wrong and half right. I think both sides of a sale to minor are breaking the law.

Little Lamb
48949
Points
Little Lamb 12/28/11 - 10:03 am
0
0
Thank you, Harley. What you

Thank you, Harley. What you are saying makes sense.

The interesting thing here is the gray area of people who are eighteen, nineteen, and twenty years old. They are not minors, yet they are singled out in a special way regarding alcohol purchases.

fftaz71
108
Points
fftaz71 12/28/11 - 12:13 pm
0
0
Lawpig, Ive been through jury

Lawpig, Ive been through jury selection and understand the process. A lawyer can use premptory challenges to keep someone off a jury. The most common times a challenge is used is when theres obvious bias or a similar background.

Aprillynn9281
0
Points
Aprillynn9281 12/28/11 - 02:00 pm
0
0
I'm curious as to whether she

I'm curious as to whether she has spent time in jail for DUI that she is openly admitting to by filing this lawsuit.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs