Opinion

Manning v. Andy

  • 454 Pa. 237
  • 310 A.2d 75
  • 1973 Pa. LEXIS 751
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Oct 10, 1973
Status
Published
On the bench
Manderino, Jones, Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix, Mandeeino
Cited by
46 cases
Authority
More cited than 97.6%

declaring: “[t]he reasoning of Randall, as to the meaning of Any other person is indisputable. . . . Only by a gross [distortion] of the meaning of language can we interpret Any other person to mean Some but not All persons”

How later courts described this case

  • declaring: “[t]he reasoning of Randall, as to the meaning of Any other person is indisputable. . . . Only by a gross [distortion] of the meaning of language can we interpret Any other person to mean Some but not All persons”
  • “[o]nly licensed persons engaged in the Sale of intoxicants have been held to be civilly liable to injured parties”
  • Concurring Opinion by Pomeroy, J.
  • furnishing liquor to employee

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Clair Manning has appealed from an order of the trial court dismissing his complaint in trespass for failure to state a cause of action in negligence. The dismissal occurred following preliminary objections by appellees, John Andy and Frank Andy, individually and trading as J & F Rubber Company and Andy’s Tire Service. On appeal the Superior Court sustained the trial court by a per curiam order. We granted allocatur.

The complaint alleged that appellant sustained injuries in an automobile accident caused by Russell E. Walters, who was under the influence of liquor. Appellant was a passenger in Walters’ vehicle when the acci *239 dent occurred. Both appellant and Walters were employees of appellees, who had earlier held a party for their employees. Appellant further alleged that: “At said party the [appellees] did furnish or supply intoxicating liquors or beverages which were consumed by the said Bussell E. Walters as well as [the appellant], and did continue to furnish intoxicating liquors or beverages to the said Bussell E. Walters when he was in a state of visible intoxication.”

In dismissing the complaint, the trial court held that no cause of action was stated under any theory and specifically held that §493(1) of the Liquor Code, Act of April 12, 1951, P. L. 90, Art. IV, §493(1), as amended, 47 P.S. 4-493(1), which defines certain unlawful conduct, does not impose civil liability upon appellees. 1 Section 493(1) of the Liquor Code does impose criminal liability for certain unlawful conduct and reads as follows: “It shall be unlawful . . . for any licensee or the board, or any employe, servant or agent of such licensee or the board, or any other person, to sell, furnish or give any liquor ... or to permit any liquor ... to be sold, furnished or given, to any person visibly intoxicated. . . .”

We find no error in the trial court’s dismissal of appellant’s complaint. Only licensed persons engaged in the sale of intoxicants have been held to be civilly liable to injured parties. Jardine v. Upper Darby Lodge No. 1973, 413 Pa. 626 , 198 A. 2d 550 (1964). Appellant asks us to impose civil liability on nonlicensed persons like appellees, who furnish intoxicants for no remuneration. We decline to do so. While appellant’s proposal may have merit, we feel that a decision of this monumental nature is best left to the legislature.

Order affirmed.

Although appellant took advantage of an opportunity to amend his complaint, the demurrer was sustained to the amended complaint as well.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.