overruled on other grounds in Vesely v. Sager (1971) 5 Cal.3d 153, 167 [95 Cal.Rptr. 623, 486 P.2d 151]
How later courts described this case
- overruled on other grounds in Vesely v. Sager (1971) 5 Cal.3d 153, 167 [95 Cal.Rptr. 623, 486 P.2d 151]
- overruled on other point in Vesely v. Sager (1971) 5 Cal.3d 153, 167 [95 Cal.Rptr. 623, 486 P.2d 151]
- which stated: "as to a competent person it is the voluntary consumption, not the sale or gift, of intoxicating liquor which is the proximate cause of injury resulting from its use; ..."
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Overruled by Vesely v. Sager, 5 Cal. 3d 153 (1971)
45 Cal.2d 345, 350-351 , overruled on other grounds in Vesely v. Sager (1971) 5 Cal.3d 153
The opinion
*357 SPENCE, J.
— I concur.
Further consideration of this case upon rehearing convinces me that the governing law, as heretofore enunciated by the courts of this state as well as by the courts of practically all other jurisdictions, precludes plaintiff’s recovery. I am further in agreement with the view expressed in the main opinion that the established rules should be followed until such time as these rules may be changed by legislative action. I therefore conclude that the trial court properly sustained the demurrer, and that the judgment should be affirmed.