So it begins: Gerald Ung & 5 Bars Being Sued in Civil Court

[mythaeus]

...In addition to Ung, DiDonato is suing — you guessed it — various Philadelphia drinking establishments that were patronized by Ung, DiDonato and friends on the evening in question (January 17, 2010). The bars being sued are Eulogy Belgian Tavern, Khyber Pass Pub, Paradigm Restaurant & Bar, Field House Sports Bar, and — my personal favorite — Lucy’s Hat Shop.

Source: http://abovethelaw.com/2012/01/didon...ith-a-lawsuit/

I wonder how the newly passed PA Stand Your Ground/Castle Doctrine work into this civil case since the law went in effect after the incident.

Al

[-JD-]

For those not familiar with the backstory: http://forum.pafoa.org/news-123/86076-old-city-shooting.html

[tacticalreload]

And this is EXACTLY the reason that I don't fault bars or other vendors of alcohol when they do things like swipe DL's, not accept LTCF as proper ID, and deny OC in their establishments (all of which have been addressed in various threads over the past few days, weeks, months). The liability is monstrous because any asshat with the inclination can sue and it just takes a few other asshats to award him big bucks out of your pocket.

I like the complaint filed with the court: He was walking down the street unarmed and was assaulted and shot several times. Well, that doesn't leave out any details, does it?

[mythaeus]

And this is EXACTLY the reason that I don't fault bars or other vendors of alcohol when they do things like swipe DL's, not accept LTCF as proper ID, and deny OC in their establishments (all of which have been addressed in various threads over the past few days, weeks, months). The liability is monstrous because any asshat with the inclination can sue and it just takes a few other asshats to award him big bucks out of your pocket.

I like the complaint filed with the court: He was walking down the street unarmed and was assaulted and shot several times. Well, that doesn't leave out any details, does it?

Ummm...Ung CC'ed. He probably didn't use his LTCF to get into these bars (they would laugh at him). Knowing these bars personally, I guarantee you that they won't let you in if you OC'ed. I'm not sure how anything you supported the bar doing (swipe DL's, not accept LTCF as proper ID, and deny OC) would have prevented this self-defense shooting or this civil suit.

We are in a litigious society. Anything can be taken to civil court. As a matter of fact, the bars are being sued for "negligent sale of alcoholic beverages … to Thomas Kelly and Andrew DiLoretto [sic] was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries" as well, not just Ung.

Al

[LorDiego01]

I can't believe the DiDonato asshats are not trying to make people forget what a failure their son turned out to be.

I guess a little attempt at a cash-grab is not too low even for limp-dicked Eddie.

[mythaeus]

The link I posted actually contains quite a bit of good details on the suit. It also link to a pretty good analysis of possibility for Ung to counter sue:

Partially...

...DiDonato is represented by the Bob Mongeluzzi / Andrew Duffy / Jeff Goodman team at Saltz Mongeluzzi, all of whom I know through other litigation, and they’re all quite capable lawyers. The complaint doesn’t spell it out, but I can see the theory: if Ung hadn’t been served alcohol while visibility intoxicated, or if DiDonato’s friends hadn’t been served alcohol while visibility intoxicated, then the incident between Ung and DiDonato wouldn’t have escalated to the point of Ung shooting DiDonato. One ironic point: DiDonato’s claim against the establishments that served Ung alcohol may rise or fall on Ung’s testimony.

It’s a clever theory against the bars and restaurants, one that, depending on the facts, might get him an insurance policy limits offer from one or more of the defendants. As I mentioned below, though, I’m doubtful the claim against Ung will prevail — indeed, Ung might have a better claim against DiDonato based on the trial testimony.

http://www.litigationandtrial.com/20...nal-acquittal/

Al

[tacticalreload]

Ummm...Ung CC'ed. He probably didn't use his LTCF to get into these bars (they would laugh at him). Knowing these bars personally, I guarantee you that they won't let you in if you OC'ed. I'm not sure how anything you supported the bar doing (swipe DL's, not accept LTCF as proper ID, and deny OC) would have prevented this self-defense shooting or this civil suit.

We are in a litigious society. Anything can be taken to civil court. As a matter of fact, the bars are being sued for "negligent sale of alcoholic beverages … to Thomas Kelly and Andrew DiLoretto [sic] was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries" as well, not just Ung.

Al

There has been a lot of rancor directed at bars in various threads because of things like I mentioned. However, my point is that these establishments have a serious amount of liability hovering over their heads from all angles... therefore, they try to reduce that liability in any way that they can. I wasn't saying that those particular actions have anything to do with the specifics of this story, but rather to speak in generalizations about frivolous lawsuits and trying to concurrently run a business and not be sued out of existence.

When adults (over 21) purchase a product (alcohol) that is well known to have a certain effect (intoxication) and that products successfully produces those effects, some people still see fit to blame the person who sold them the stuff. It's like idiots suing gun companies for producing a gun that properly launches bullets because they don't like where those bullets go after they leave the barrel.

[Mosinshooter762]

And this is EXACTLY the reason that I don't fault bars or other vendors of alcohol when they do things like swipe DL's, not accept LTCF as proper ID, and deny OC in their establishments (all of which have been addressed in various threads over the past few days, weeks, months). The liability is monstrous because any asshat with the inclination can sue and it just takes a few other asshats to award him big bucks out of your pocket.

I like the complaint filed with the court: He was walking down the street unarmed and was assaulted and shot several times. Well, that doesn't leave out any details, does it?

Is there any allegation that Ung's or anyone elses ID was not scanned or that Ung or anyone involved in this case was a minor? Is there any allegations regarding weapons policies?

I fail to see where any of this comes into play in this case from scanning over the allegations in the complaint. I understand what your trying to point out, but the bar can scan your id 10 times, have huge databases of information from the id scans, and have a weapons policy that is like a long scroll, and it won't make a darn bit of difference in many (if not almost all) cases. Maybe it would make difference if a minor is involved (served). In the end, anyone can go to the court house and file a civil complaint for a relatively small sum.

[GunLawyer001]

Is there any allegation that Ung's or anyone elses ID was not scanned or that Ung or anyone involved in this case was a minor? Is there any allegations regarding weapons policies?

I fail to see where any of this comes into play in this case from scanning over the allegations in the complaint.

I'm not sure that there's any evidence that Gerald was even tipsy, much less intoxicated. That's probably just cover for DiDonato tossing his buddies under the bus so that he can get a settlement from the bars. His theory would be, in essence, "my two friends are drunken assholes who provoked this guy into shooting me, an innocent bystander, who was doing nothing more than punching him in the face when he shot me."

I'd be curious to see what was in DiDonato's blood when they treated him at the hospital. I'm guessing it would burn in your standard oil lamp. He wasn't the designated driver (weren't they "looking for a cab" when they went walking after Gerald and his friends?) So his story would be that he went out for a fun night of watching his buddies get drunk, he didn't stop them from drinking, it was the responsibility of the bars to instantly gauge how much his friends had to drink at MULTIPLE LOCATIONS that night, and he had no obligation to prevent his buddies from getting drunk and beating up on strangers for fun and sport. Somehow, it was more foreseeable to the busy bartender than it was to DiDonato, who watched them drink, knew their personalities, and actually led the pursuit of Gerald with them.

This is not the attitude of an upstanding citizen. This is what some 3-time loser says in jail, "they should have stopped us before we did the crime". It's like some wife abuser who blames his victim for provoking him, and apparently his friends and family haven't the nerve to tell him that this is all his fault.

[FNG19]

I'd be curious to see what was in DiDonato's blood when they treated him at the hospital.

Obligatory quote to direct this question to GL: I'm sure it hasn't escaped anyone's notice -- particularly not the high-priced hired guns being brought to bear on this case -- that HB40 includes civil immunity for situations like this. Recognizing that you're not involved with the suit and thus are not privy to the inside details of the defense, how do you see that playing out with respect to Ung? It seems to me that this is the first high profile case involving those protections, so this could be very, very interesting.

Another question that comes to mind is this: The event in question happened pre-HB40. Is there a timing issue here where those protections couldn't be leveraged because the law wasn't in force when the deployment of defensive force occurred? Or, is the only timing issue at play the activation of HB40 in the beginning of September occurring prior to the suit's filing in December (making those protections valid here)?