Cubs Combat Casino
The Return of The Chicagoist Reader Meet-Up
County Sales Tax Rollback Vetoed - Here We Go Again
PHOTOS: Peaches And Amanda Blank At Metro
How To: Simple Salad Dressing
Jane Radostits, the DuPage County prosecutor who was killed when her state-issued car swerved into oncoming traffic may have had as many as eight drinks before driving on May 11, according to a lawsuit filled yesterday on behalf of Michele Lubinski, 36, of West Chicago. 
Lubinski, whose left arm and leg were broken in the crash, is seeking damages from Oak Brook's Kona Grill after lab tests revealed Radostits' blood alcohol level to be .25 percent (three times the legal limit in Illinois).
Radostits was drinking on May 11 other DuPage County prosecutors after a bomb threat closed the DuPage County courthouse for several hours. During the four hours the group was at the Kona Grill, Radastits ordered "between four to seven" lemon martinis and one beer.
While we understand that Lubinski legally has the total right to sue under the Illinois DRAM Shop Act, we always find ourselves a little confused after reading about these cases. We believe that bartenders should cut people off when they have had too much to drink. But does four martinis over four hours counts as too much? And how can you tell? Chicagoist has definitely (stop reading now, mom!) been over-served while out drinking, and our bartender seemed more than happy to take our money in exchange for libations. We've also been at a bar where a patron was cut off, and the bartender sent him on his way with a chipper "Have a safe drive home!"
Clearly, drinking and driving is no joking matter. But Chicagoist's question is, how can a bar or restaurant know what to do when a patron is somewhere in between the middle of sober and blitzed, and they have no way to know if the person will be driving? How would Kona Grill have the foresight to know?
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Off topic, but does anyone know the font that reads "Martini Bar" in the attached image?
Thanks.
One thing that confuses me about suburban bars is that EVERYONE is driving home. I mean, couldn't a cop just wait outside and nab everyone?
I think is fitting that she busted drunk drivers but herself thought it was ok to drink and drive because she was the law. Just like all the cops that drink and drive because they can get away with it. I am sure it is well known in the Prosecutors Office they all drink and drive.
I don't really see how you can blame the establishment. Drinking is a personal decision. She knew she was driving, she should have just one or two (on none!). How can the waitstaff serve food and drinks to many tables that are always changing, then also be responsible for those that may be drunk (and there's no law about being drunk)? How would the restaurant know that she would be driving?
If I ever get pulled over for drinking and driving: "But officer the bartender kept serving me. The auto company made the car that I decided I had to drive. The seat belt's uncomfortable. I like to drive extremely fast. The cell phone company sold me this phone, how could I not talk on it while driving recklessly?
Clearly this is the restaurant's fault.
Her B.A.C. was 0.25? How strong were those martinis? Assuming she was a small woman weighing about 120 lbs, that's like 8 shots in an hour.
When I was bartending we were required to keep track of alcohol intake and make an educated guess when they had too much to drink (we also had to retake the ServSafe certification test every 3 years - many of the restaurants required a passing score to work there). Legally, a bartender is not allowed to serve to the point of intoxication. There are plenty of signs to look for and this should have been obvious to the bartender. Now, do bartenders really stop serving right before you are legally drunk, yeah right. But many of them know that they can be held accountable for something like this.
It's her fault and no one else. When you are an adult you have to make your own decisions. I would bet she drove drunk regularly. Hes co workers didn't seem to realize she was too drunk they drove her back to the state car so they should be sueing the state if anyone at all. The bar should not be liable. Birkett knows most of his staff are heavy drinks as does Devine. You gotto know what bars they go to but they get wasted.
Not making any guesses one way or another about Radostits, but speaking in general- it's very obvious when the average weekend drinker is overserved. The seasoned drinker? MUCH better at hiding it. This is why I have such a hard time with laws like this. Lots of people who have no business getting behind the wheel of a car are VERY good at behaving normally and keeping the drinks coming.
Just keep in mind folks, alcohol, automobiles, and drinking and driving kill more people than guns many times over. Where's the discussion for that (in general, not here)?
I have to agree with K. I would consider myself a "seasoned" drinker, and have easily ordered more than 8 drinks from a bartender without appearing legally intoxicated. Now, if they can establish the bartender was aware Radostits was intoxicated and driving--and he/she kept serving and/or never offered to call her a cab--I think the victim has every right to collect from the bar.
Yes, it's possible for a bartender to monitor the alcohol intake of customers; provided they are sitting at the bar, all their drinks are being ordered from the same bartender, and it's slow enough to have time to pay attention to that sort of thing instead of just cranking out more drinks. But in a busy suburban restaurant/bar with several waitresses and multiple bartenders? No freaking way.
The idea that the Kona Grill is responsible for her stupidity (and the stupidity of coworkers who allowed her to drive in that state) is beyond ridiculous.
Sure, if she had been stumbling around into things and/or horribly slurring her speech and they continued to serve her knowing with absolute certainty that she was going to be driving, then yeah, they would be liable. Or if it were a pack of 21 year olds all pounding mass quantities of shots with no apparent designated driver that were served all night. But a bunch of State's Attorneys sitting around drinking after work? Puhleese! If there ever was a group where the expectation of social responsibility was a given, that would be it. "Should we cut off those States Attorneys sitting over there?" is not a phrase you're going to hear very often. In fact, just about any group of professional looking adults who are not visibly shitfaced are going to get served as much as they want because the staff knows the hissy fits and hassles that will ensue if they dare to cut them off.
That is the grand hypocrisy of our society that all bartenders and waitresses must deal with, the fact that everyone wants another drink and will bitch to high heaven if they aren't served; but will always blame the bar when they fuck up. "I was overserved" or some similar bullshit cop out (How bartenders loath that phrase!). It's at the back of every bar employee's head after every busy shift, "Am I going to get sued for the actions of some person who I may not have even seen all night?"
Basically the DuPage County prosecutor's office is who should be sued (if anyone), but the lawyer for the plaintiff knows their career would be screwed for all eternity if they tried that, so it becomes time to play "Blame The Bartender."