Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Meade v. Freeman

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided August 28, 1969No. 10249Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDonaldson, Justice

I dissent from the majority opinion and concur with that portion of Judge Prather’s special concurring opinion which holds that by applying fundamental and well-established common law principles a cause of action is stated against a liquor vendor whose bartender in violation of a statute sells intoxicating liquor to an obviously in*404toxicated person under circumstances which should have warned the bartender that his sale would create an unreasonable risk and the subsequent acts of the intoxicated person results in injury to an innocent third person.

I dissent from that portion of Judge Prather’s…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. The Paquete HabanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  2. United States v. TynenSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
  3. McAdams v. BarbieriSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1956
  4. State v. DavidsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Town of Montclair v. StanoyevichSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1951

31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API