Mom sues Coors over son's death in accident, Suit also names girlfriend and mother
 

This is the kind of crap that kills me -- people failing to accept responsibility and trying to lay blame. Am I correct in assuming that this will get tossed in short order?


RENO, Nevada (AP) -- The mother of a 19-year-old killed in a traffic accident is suing Coors Brewing Co., claiming that it promotes underage drinking.

Jodie Pisco, of Reno, contends Coors has failed in its duty to protect the country's youth from drinking. Her son, Ryan, was killed in 2002 after he drank Coors at a party and drove his girlfriend's car into a light pole at 90 mph, the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in Washoe County District Court, seeks unspecified damages. It accused Coors of "glorifying a culture of youth, sex and glamour while hiding the dangers of alcohol abuse and addiction."

Laura Sankey, a spokeswoman for Golden, Colorado-based Coors, said that although she could not comment on pending litigation, the company "doesn't want underage consumers -- period."

"Tragedies like this further reinforce why the fight against underage drinking and drunk driving must continue," Sankey told the Reno Gazette-Journal.

Also named in the suit were Ryan Pisco's girlfriend and her mother. The lawsuit alleges the girlfriend allowed Pisco, who lacked a valid driver's license, to drive off in her car, which had been given to her by her mother.

I don't think it'll get tossed. The gf and her mom are in serious ****. Giving alcohol to a minor? That's pretty serious in most states.

Anyway, my friends' parents used to be pretty lenient on the beer drinking at their houses. They would actually throw parties where underage kids got seriously drunk. Their reasoning was better in their own home under supervision than having to resort to stealing and fake ID's to get their kicks. Most of us just crashed at the house after the party, nobody got into a car.

You just never know with juries these days. I don't know how it works, but the judge could probably toss out the Coors part. But the gf and her mom giving alcohol to a kid part? I dunno... that actually sounds like it has some merit. The law doesn't mess around with the whole alcohol and minors thing these days.

I suppose I should have clarified. My problem is specifically with the litigation aimed at Coors. To me (from my ignorant layman's viewpoint), the inclusion of Coors could weaken the entire suit by bringing the plaintiff's credibility into question. BTW, the article does not address the source of the alcohol. The girlfriend/mother aspect seems to be about allowing him to drive the car.

To me, it sounds like Coors had nothing to do with it. In the courtroom who knows? I know of one recent case where the jury stuck a 20 million dollar verdict on International Flavors and Fragrance which (IMO of course) wasn't responsible for anything. Read it for yourself, see what you think.

http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/040322/stocks_iff_lawsuits_1.html

I don't expect the Coors case to get tossed if the IFF one didn't.

Are they? Maybe, but they apparently did not supply him with the alcohol.

Of course Coors is not responsible. And unless they held him down and forced the beer down his throat, then the girlfriend and the mom are not responsible either.

Stupid kids gets drunk, wraps his car around a pole. Stupid kid is dead. Stupid kid's mom wants to blame everyone else, instead of her stupid kid.

Typical.

Follow a stupid kid home, knock on the door, and a stupid parent is likely to answer.

Mike

I think anything that happens on your property when you're there is your responsibility. It may be your responsibility even if you're not there. Where's Don, fishing?

Oh, the popcorn butter deal -- yes, I recall reading about the case and the award. I'm not sure I agree with the analogy, though. These seem like very different issues to me. Well, maybe narwhal can shed some light on this...

In this case the butter flavor was shipped to the plant where it was to be used in production of popcorn. It was mishandled at the plant, and the plant didn't follow FDA safety guidelines. The supplier was slapped with a 20 million dollar verdict, not the plant, even though the supplier had nothing to do with mishandling the product. It was the plant management who failed to follow instructions. Think

Butter flavor supplier=Coors
Plant management=whoever gave him the beer
Dead workers=dead Ryan Pisco

I see your point....

"IFF says the flavor meets regulatory standards for foods and drugs when handled properly."

....but I am assuming that the jury did not concur with this statement and found the product to be generally hazardous (just an assumption -- I don't know enough details really). Apparently, an appeal is in the works that should clarify the issue.

It worked with the gun industry. Juries finding mfr's guilty because some POS used an xxx pistol -that he had stolen- to kill someone during a robery. Makes about as much sense as this.

It's about time the other industries -the auto industry included- felt the rediculousness of these types of suits.

Forget Coors, I don't think any sane person could hold them liable, but you just never know what happens in the minds of jurors.

I'm telling you man, the juries often see it the other way. To my knowledge, whatever happens on your property when you're present is your responsibility. If you even tacitly allow kids to drink on your property, if you know that kids are drinking on your property and do nothing, you're responsible in the eyes of the law. Most homeowner's policies include umbrella coverage just in case something like this happens. Coors has deep pockets, they could easily settle, but I don't see why they wouldn't choose to contest just on principle alone.

You really think it's the judges' fault that these cases get heard? The judge is there to make sure the procedural parts of the hearing go the right way. Judges don't really, "judge" I don't think. It's not up to them to decide these cases, it's up to jurors. Everyone is entitled to a trial by a jury of their peers. I think it's essential that everyone has their day in court, no matter how trivial or far fetched. Mom was probably advised by some ambulance chaser lawyer that she had a good chance of becoming rich.

Same topic, different item
 

Motorcycle Helmets:

I believe there is only one motorcycle helmet manufacturer in the US left, Bell. They said HALF the cost goes to their legal department.

A case that rubs me the wrong way was a suit filed because somebody owned a helmet and wasn't wearing it when he crashed.