Court Opinion

ID: 9666009
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 01:02:02.847997+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:22.062957
License: Public Domain

Grant, J.,
concurring in the result.
I believe that fact questions were presented as to whether defendants were negligent in the operation of their bar business and as to whether those acts of commission or omission resulted in plaintiff’s damages, whether those damages occurred inside or just outside the bar itself. I agree, however, that the actions of the decedent’s party in returning to the bar area and endangering Andrysik constituted an intervening cause, which could not reasonably be foreseen by defendants, and that, *180therefore, defendants’ actions or failure to act was not the proximate cause of the damages. I would affirm on that ground.