holding valet parking service had no duty to withhold automobiles from an intoxicated patron
How later courts described this case
- holding valet parking service had no duty to withhold automobiles from an intoxicated patron
- parking valet service not liable to third party struck by intoxicated owner to whom vehicle was returned
- restaurant valet owed no duty to withhold vehicle when valet returned keys to an intoxicated restaurant patron, as there was no special relationship and thus no duty to control his conduct
- Valet service had no duty to withhold automobile from intoxicated patron of restaurant, as there was no special relationship and thus no duty to control his conduct.
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
*80 SONENSHINE, J., Concurring.
I do not adopt all of the reasoning of the majority. However, I concur in the results and in the sentiments expressed in the conclusion.
Appellants’ petition for review by the Supreme Court was denied February 16, 1989.