Court Opinion

ID: 9532365
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:20:41.583302+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:44.913761
License: Public Domain

Peters, J.
(dissenting). I do not agree with the holding of the majority that the trial court correctly refused to charge that Reynold Burger was negligent in providing beer to David Quigley, a minor, *274in violation of General Statutes § 30-86.1 Despite Moore v. Bunk, 154 Conn. 644, 647-49, 228 A.2d 510 (1967), I would limit the common-law rule of proximate cause stated in Nolan v. Morelli, 154 Conn. 432, 436, 226 A.2d 383 (1967), to cases alleging common-law negligence. I do not believe that the policy represented by legislative enactment of § 30-86 is likely to be vindicated in fact by the authority to impose criminal penalties pursuant to § 30-113.2

 Section 30-86 provides, in relevant part: “sales to minors, intoxicated persons and drunkards. . . . [A]ny person, except the parent or guardian of a minor, who delivers or gives any such [alcoholic] liquors to such minor, except on the order of a practicing physician, shall be subject to the penalties of section 30-113.”

 Section 30-113 provides: “penalties. Any person convicted of a violation of any provision of this chapter, for which a specified penalty is not imposed, shall, for each offense, be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year or both.”