OT: Shooting victim sues 5 Ann Arbor bars
The 26-year-old Chicago man shot at a downtown Ann Arbor dance club is suing every bar at which the gunman drank before the shooting.
I thought this was worth posting as many of us have visited the bars in question.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:14 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 10th, 2015 at 11:50 AM ^
habana didnt let them in and kicked them out without serving them because they were visibly out of control and drunk.
i heard this just a couple days after the incident.
While I always preferred Rush to Habana, I have to say Habana's security was far superior to that of Rush St.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:07 AM ^
first place, but why not make a cash grab? /s
April 10th, 2015 at 11:08 AM ^
Why would they even bring up the bouncer not patting him down before entering in the lawsuit? Is that something they really expect the bouncer at every bar/club to do? Don't blame the bars, blame the guy who illegally carried his firearm into a bar and then illegally drank alcohol while carrying. Regulating when to cut people off once showing signs of intoxication is an extremely difficult thing to do (unless it's blatantly obvious), especially for places that make most of their income from alcohol sales. Most places just make you leave if you start falling asleep.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:17 AM ^
The bar is responsible for the safety of it's patrons.
The bar was supposed to do these pat downs for a reason. Instead they got lazy with security and this happened. They are absolutely at fault.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:37 AM ^
But is every bar supposed to pat down its patrons before they enter? Isn't that going to lead to metal detectors in every social hangout? And what about any other service venue, a gas station suppose - if this guy walked into a Mobil and picked a fight, shot someone, isn't the gas station responsible for the security of their patrons as well? Would we expect that everyone going into a gas station would be patted down?
April 10th, 2015 at 11:50 AM ^
The bar is responsible for safety because they serve alcohol.
Bars don't have to do security checks, but it says in the article that they were supposed to do it and they didn't. They laxed on security because it got too busy.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:54 AM ^
The article does not say they were supposed to do it. It said that security had be decreased due to an increase in capacity. At no point does it say the bar was "supposed" to do anything.
Techincally in Ohio all you need to do is put up a "no firearms allowed" sign at each entrance, and you are covered as far as law enforcement is concerned.
If you want to prevent people from illegally (or even legally I guess) carrying guns onto the premises, yeah that's probably your only recourse. Of course, that probably won't stop a glock. Dunno if it is possible to get glock ammo past a metal detector.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:37 AM ^
Does every bar you go to pat you down upon entering? I can't remember the last time I've been patted down before entering a bar. That's not standard protocol.
April 10th, 2015 at 12:06 PM ^
I'm going to guess the gun ownership rate of Ann Arbor is pretty well below national averages
April 10th, 2015 at 11:41 AM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 11:47 AM ^
We have no evidence that he was beligerent when they let him in. If he was .17 at the end of the night, it was very possible he was .12 or so when he entered Rush St and acting perfectly normal. Some people show their drunkeness better than others - I know plenty of people who can be near-black out drunk and seem just fine to a bouncer. And it's not like anyone entering a place like Rush St is stone cold sober when they come in.
I agree that they should have been better about breaking up the incident before it got out of hand, but I wasn't there to see it so it's hard to really judge that too harshly. We may be talking about a matter of seconds here.
April 10th, 2015 at 12:07 PM ^
We have no evidence that he was beligerent when they let him in.
Not exactly.
It is told that one of the bars before Rush St. tossed him for being drunk and disorderly.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:39 AM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 11:54 AM ^
I get that, but it was in the suit, not just something MLive randomly said. It's like the lawyer feels it's the bar's fault for not patting him down, I've never heard of or seen a bouncer patting someone down before endering a bar. If they only sued the last bar for the reason they saw he was belligerent and didn't break up his fight right away, then I can see where they're coming from. Instead, they sue every bar and complain about the bouncer not patting him down? Sounds like they're throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks, and I really, really hate that.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:58 AM ^
I also really, really hate that. But that's just how our legal system works and it's how lawyers are taught. Find every possible reason someone can be at fault and let the judge decide what's legit and what isn't.
Really? I've seen it regularly since I was legally old enough to enter liquor establishments. not so much at small town country bars, but a lot of nightclubs and higher end bars will pat down. Not just for weapons, but for drugs and alcohol that people will try and sneak in.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:09 AM ^
This seems like a reasonable thing to expect to happen to you at Rush Street. Assumed the risk walking in.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:16 AM ^
I don't blame the guy for shaking down the bars. It's a good bet they will settle with him and he gets his expenses covered at a minimum. That's what our legal sysem allows and even encourages. Who actually deserves culpability is largely irrelevent.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:37 AM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 11:39 AM ^
I blame him. Sometimes you do the right thing, instead of the thing that nets you the most money. Sometimes unfortunate things happen to people and not everyone you can think of is to blame. This is why you get insurance and he wouldn't have to go around blaming everyone.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:41 AM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 11:27 AM ^
Maybe he should sue the bachelor party too.
April 10th, 2015 at 11:43 AM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 11:59 AM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 12:08 PM ^
He could sue the shooter's parents for raising him that way. Possibly even the shooter's grandparents as well for raising his parents in such a way that permitted them to raise him in that way.
April 10th, 2015 at 12:58 PM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 11:39 AM ^
To be fair to the accused, the victim does look highly shootable
April 10th, 2015 at 11:42 AM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 11:51 AM ^
http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-always-carries-gun-in-case-he-need…
April 10th, 2015 at 12:12 PM ^
One of my many lawyer friends told me that once. His point was that judges have crowded dockets and are pre-disposed to dismissing anything they consider not worth their time. I think this is basically true.
Any time you hear about lawsuits that seem stupid they always start making sense when you learn more about the details. Like the judges, lawyers generally don't want to waste their time either.
April 10th, 2015 at 12:50 PM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 12:23 PM ^
April 10th, 2015 at 12:25 PM ^
Since when are there downtown Ann Arbor dance clubs? I guess I haven't been back in a while.
Did anyone else notice how light the shooter's sentence was? A four year turn round is pretty light, in my limited lawyerly experience. Judge must've liked something he said.
of how insane our civil legal system is.
The ONLY person responsible was the shooter. Period.
I feel bad for the bar owners who are now being legally assaulted and lose no matter what the legal outcome.
Except that liquor establisments are legally responsible for their patrons while they are on the premises, and in some cases after they leave the premises depending if the patron was over served.
The guy should just get a GoFundMe. He'll be rich in a week with a story like this.
I'll never understand why people think that it is a good idea to carry a loaded firearm on their person when going out to get shit faced drunk.