Court Opinion

ID: 9884839
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 03:17:11.852244+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:41.289857
License: Public Domain

FORSBERG, Judge,
Dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. In Cole v. City of Spring Lake Park, 314 N.W.2d 836 (Minn.1982), the court held that the legislature by its 1977 Amendment of the Civil Damages Act preempted a common law cause of action against a social host who furnishes liquor to an intoxicated guest. The court distinguished other cases which recognized common law actions for liquor violations on the basis that those cases involved a commercial vendor. This is clearly not the instant case where an employer furnished, rather than sold, liquor to employees at a Christmas office party.
*784Moreover, in Cady v. Coleman, 315 N.W.2d 593 (Minn.1982), the court held that a law firm was not liable under the dram shop act for liquor violations for liquor furnished to its clients. Again, the court emphasized that it was the legislature’s intent to restrict liability only to commercial vendors.