Date: 06-04-2002

Case Style: Paragon Family Restaurant d/b/a Round the Corner Pub v. Mario Bartolini, Jr.

Case Number: 45A03-0106-CV-212

Judge: Robb

Court: In The Court of Appeals of Indiana

Plaintiff's Attorney: Thomas A. Curton and James R. Branit

Defendant's Attorney: Barry D. Sherman, Kristen D. Hill>

Description: The facts most favorable to the judgment reveal that the Pub is a bar See footnote located in northwest Indiana. On September 19, 1997, Bartolini arrived at the Pub to socialize with some friends. Later that night, Jeffery Todd, who was underage, and his of-age friend John Mattull visited the Pub where they consumed several alcoholic beverages. Todd was never carded by any personnel of the Pub.

At closing time, Todd and Mattull exited the Pub followed by Bartolini and his companions. Todd and Mattull were intoxicated. Thereafter, Todd and Bartolini became involved in an verbal altercationSee footnote which culminated in Todd and Mattull attacking Bartolini. As a result of the attack, Bartolini sustained injuries and was hospitalized. See footnote

Consequently, Bartolini filed suit against the Pub in the Lake Superior Court on the basis of negligence. Bartolini's complaint provides in pertinent part that:

3. [When Bartolini] left [the Pub] on the morning of September 20, 1997, he was physically attacked, assaulted and brutally beaten by John Mattull and Jeffery Todd in the parking lot of [the Pub].

4. That [the Pub] breached [its] duty to protect [Bartolini] from other patrons of [the Pub] by serving alcoholic beverages to [Bartolini's] assailants, one of whom was a minor, after they were visibly intoxicated, failing to maintain the peace, failing to provide adequate security, all despite knowledge of the likelihood of the acts of the assailants and otherwise failing to properly protect and assist [Bartolini] and otherwise failing to exercise reasonable care and caution.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the
full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome: Based on the forgoing, we hold that the trial court properly denied the Pub's motion for judgment on the evidence because Bartolini established the duty of care and proximate cause elements of negligence. However, we hold that the jury's allocation of eighty percent (80%) fault to the Pub is contrary to and against the weight of the evidence. Consequently, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.

Plaintiff's Experts: Unavailable

Defendant's Experts: Unavailable

Comments: C.L.