SUNSERI V. PUCCIA
422 N.E.2d 925 (1981)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Sunseri (P) appealed a directed verdict for Puccia (Ds) when it was
determined that P started the fight.
FACTS: Sunseri (P) brought an action against Puccia (D), owner of a restaurant and
lounge, and Goeske (D), his bartender, for injuries received during an altercation on the
restaurant premises. Goeske (D) asked to see his identification verifying his legal age to
purchase liquor. P displayed some identification cards and Goeske (D) walked away. P
complained to a friend that he was 'tired of being carded.' Goeske (D) overheard this remark
and told P that if he didn't like it, he should leave. P apologized, but Goeske (D) became
increasingly angered. P gave Goeske (D) the finger as P stood up to leave. Goeske (D)
threatened to 'beat the hell' out of him. Goeske (D) was considerably taller and heavier. P
went for the door but Goeske (D) came from behind the bar and grabbed him. P swung to defend
himself but missed. Goeske (D) then threw P to the floor and kicked him repeatedly. Goeske
(D) allowed P to stand up, escorted him to the door and once outside, Goeske (D) punched
plaintiff in the face, threw plaintiff to the ground and jumped on top of him. Goeske (D)
began to 'gnaw' on P's ear and P felt Goeske's (D) teeth pierce his ear at least three
times. About one week later, the doctor amputated the damaged part of his ear. The trial
court directed verdicts as to both Ds, relying on Sikorski's testimony that P initiated the
fight inside the restaurant. P appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment