Court Opinion

ID: 9517640
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 00:24:53.693881+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:04:18.199809
License: Public Domain

RATLIFF, Judge,
concurring.
I cannot concur in the language in the majority opinion which criticizes the holding of this court in Ashlock v. Norris (1985), Ind.App., 475 N.E.2d 1167, trans. denied. I agree, however, that Ashlock, a case which I believe was decided properly, does not sustain Campbell's position.
I would also point out that this district has upheld imposing liability upon one who serves alcoholic beverages to an intoxicated person who subsequently inflicts injury upon a third person as a result of his drunken operation of a motor vehicle. Elsperman v. Plump (1983), Ind.App., 446 N.E.2d 1027. However, Elsperman, clearly is distinguishable from this case and lends no support to imposing liability upon either the college or the fraternity.
Except for the majority's unwarranted criticism of AsAhlock, I concur.