TSA has never batted an eye. I think the most I ever had was 4 in my baggie.

I don't disagree that the fault SHOULD be solely with the driver, but that's not what the law says so it doesn't really matter what you and I think, friend.

And, by the way--where've you been hiding? I am personally aware of many suits, some won some lost but all costing the defendant a fair amount in legal fees, regardless. There was just recently a 1.4 million lawsuit awarded here in OR, which is saying something because the legal standard is higher here than many other places.

Not all people are so smart.

Police Officer: "Where did you obtain the drinks you had?"
Driver: "I just got off the plane from JFK-LAX."
Police Officer: "What airline were you flying on?"
Driver: "Delta."
Police Officer: "And did you have any drinks anywhere else?"
Driver: "I had two drinks at the Delta club before boarding, and one more drink at the Delta club after landing."
Police Officer: "Why didn't you get your alcohol at the bar by the gate?"
Driver: "You're kidding, right? In the Delta club the drinks are free, YIPPEE!"

REMEMBER, alcohol removes or reduces people's inhibitions, meaning while someone might keep something bottled up while sober, they might not be able to keep the same thing bottled up if they are intoxicated!

Flying DL on Thursday out of WAS to LAS, best believe I'll be having more than 4! I'll have a couple extra in your honor :D.

Just did a WAS to LAS but wasn't as interesting but before that LAS trip was another on DL, which was from BOS and I had 8 rum and cokes along with 2 nips.

The point is that--win or lose--they would STILL have to defend themselves in a potentially highly public and embarrassing trial. Which costs money and makes shareholders nervous about large settlements or increased oversight, or who knows what, which costs more money. All you have to do is find witnesses that will say that the guy appeared to be drunk while on the airplane. That is the legal standard. The deplaning into an airport gives the airline the chance to look for a witness that can prove he drank more in the airport after deplaning, but it certainly doesn't stop the lawsuit from being filed in the first place.

Ultimately, the legal standard simply comes down to whether you can convince a jury.

So if you put the downside of having to defend your company against a potential, if unlikely lawsuit against the upside of serving some random passenger a 5th drink..?

Oh brother.

Case closed.

Guess this is why the airlines are no longer in business, right? All those alcohol related lawsuits just shut them down with massive monetary judgments….. :rolleyes:

Best reply in this trainwreck.

ZIGACTLY!!!

Very concisely presented! The actual costs of defending against lawsuits is sometimes so expensive that corporations and their insurance companies sometimes settle and make payouts, just to avoid the costs of discover and other litigation costs, and that does not include the negative PR fall out, and what that costs a major corporation!

You people are hilarious.

Anybody can sue anybody for anything, in theory. A lawyer will only take a case if they think they have a chance at winning. This is an area where the chances are not good. Sorry but the comment about a bar vs an airline still holds here.

I did not say that airlines are no longer in business because of lawsuits or monetary judgments, that would be obviously silly! However, in order to be responsible businesses and responsible members of the community, airlines, and all businesses, must promulgate rules and guidelines, for their employees and customers, in order to cut down on liability, expense, and litigation. Even if all it comes down to is DL cutting people off from more alcohol, so as not to have to issue $ off vouchers to a passenger who got thrown up on, as a public company, DL MUST MAKE THAT EFFORT, because as a profit driven corporation, if nothing else, DL is liable to it's own shareholders not to give up the product they are selling for free, no matter what the underlying reason is.

^

LOL Good one! ^ I must confess, I probably thought that myself a few times but never actually uttered the words.

I really liked your first post in this thread, but now you're being judgmental. :td:

Sorry, that *was* a bit over the top, I suppose. Should've quit while I was ahead! :o

No Federal Dram Shop Law
 

The Supreme Court of Georgia disagrees with you. In Delta V Townsend the court ruled that Delta was NOT liable for damages resulting from a drunk driving accident caused by a passenger served alcohol on a delta flight arriving in Atlanta. They ruled that the Georgia Dram Shop legislation does not apply to airlines.

In the case of Townsend (the victim) he did NOT win. See Delta Airlines, Inc. v. Townsend, S05G0251.

Though FAA 121.575 may say that it is "illegal" to serve alcohol to an intoxicated passenger, there is no Federal pre-emption to state dram shop laws and there is no federal dram shop law in place.

Can the airline be sued - of course, they are the deep pocket - will the "victim" win - apparently not in Georgia.