Philly Lawsuits Aim to Hold Bars Accountable for Serving Drivers Involved in Drunk-Driving Crashes

In a tragic incident last year on Interstate 95 in South Philadelphia, 21-year-old nursing student Thaduba Magdalena Turay lost her life when her vehicle was struck head-on by a driver traveling in the wrong direction. The driver, David Bonilla, 47, entered a guilty plea last month to charges of homicide by vehicle while driving under the influence. Turay, a student at Cheyney University with aspirations of becoming a doctor, died at the scene of the collision.

Following the crash, Turay’s parents, Samuel and Fatmata Turay, initiated a legal action against two establishments purported to have served Bonilla alcohol shortly before the incident. This lawsuit is one of several in Pennsylvania leveraging “dram shop laws,” which hold liquor-serving establishments accountable for damages caused by patrons who are visibly intoxicated.

Dram shop laws are designed to mitigate the repercussions of alcohol consumption, notably fatalities resulting from drunk driving incidents. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, over 34 people die daily in the United States due to alcohol-related accidents. These laws aim to encourage responsible service in venues that serve alcohol, thus contributing to public safety.

In their lawsuit filed in June in the Philadelphia Common Pleas Court, the Turay family accused Nickels Tavern and Live! Casino & Hotel of overserving Bonilla. The complaint alleges that Bonilla entered I-95 on an exit ramp at approximately 2:40 a.m. on April 14, 2024, and collided with Turay’s vehicle. The severity of the impact was such that it propelled Turay’s car across multiple lanes.

Establishments that serve alcoholic beverages are prohibited from serving minors and intoxicated individuals. The lawsuit claims that Bonilla exhibited signs of significant intoxication during his time at both the tavern and the casino. In response to the allegations, Joseph Paoloca, the manager of Nickels Tavern, asserted that the establishment adheres strictly to rules against serving intoxicated guests. He emphasized the importance of customer safety, recounting instances where he personally intervened to prevent patrons from driving under the influence.

As the legal proceedings unfold, proving visibly intoxicated service will hinge on various forms of evidence, including witness testimony, drink purchase receipts, and blood alcohol content levels. Attorneys in such cases must convincingly demonstrate that alcohol was served irresponsibly, further complicating the narrative surrounding these tragic incidents.

Pennsylvania’s dram shop law, enacted in the mid-20th century, has led to a rise in litigation aimed at bars and restaurants, particularly following high-profile incidents. While many establishments have taken proactive measures to train staff in responsible alcohol management, the potential for substantial financial liability continues to loom over such cases.

In an illustrative example of the severity of these laws, a court recently awarded over million to a woman injured in a drunk driving incident that stemmed from violations of these legal protections.

The legal landscape surrounding dram shop cases highlights the tension between personal accountability and the societal obligation of alcohol-serving establishments to prioritize the safety of their patrons and the public. As the Turay family pursues justice for their daughter’s untimely death, the larger implications of these legal doctrines are brought to the forefront of public discourse.

Media News Source