Evening Republican, Volume 20, Number 132, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 2 June 1916 — FIRING MAN’S FOOT PROVES POOR JOKE [ARTICLE]

FIRING MAN’S FOOT PROVES POOR JOKE

Supreme Tribunal Frown* on BarteM eFs Fun with Customer. St. Paul, Minn.—The official frown of the Supreme Court was placed on the didoes or cut-ups of the old style played in saloons such as setting fire to papers under a sleepy patron’s chair and playing jokes unsuspecting patrons when such caprices work an Injury. When a bartender plays a trick on a guest and injury results the saloon keeper can be sued for damages, according to an opinion of the court. The case originated at Ranler. James Brennan owned a saloon. He had given a bond to keep a quiet and orderly place. The American Surety Company stood sponsor for the bond. William Tracy was a bartender. According to complaint filed by John Lynch, formerly foreman of a gang of men on the Canadian Northern Railway, he was in the saloon keeping quiet on Sunday, June 4, 1911. Lynch alleged that while he was sitting in the place, Tracy, the bartender, poured alcohol on his foot and set fire to it, with the result that Lynch was injured and laid up for some time. Ho started suit for 12000.

The defendants In the action, the saloonkeeper and the American Surety Company demurred. Their contentions were overruled and the case was appealed with the result that the Supreme Court affirmed the order of the lower court and the case will go to trial. The case hinged mostly on tho meaning of “quiet and orderly.” The syllabus follows: 1. Under Chapter 246, Laws 1905, G. S. 1913, Section 3117, both the principal and surety on a saloon keeper’s bond are liable for any damage proximately caused by any act which is a violation of the conditions of the bond. 2. Where the person in charge of a saloon pours alcohol upon a guest and then sets fire to him there is a violation of the condition of the bond chat the licensee will keep a quiet and orderly house. 3. It is not necessary to a violation of this condition that the licensee shall be guilty of the statutory crime of keeping a disorderly house. That crime involves habitual or repeated acts of disorder, not necessary to a breach of the bond. 4. The Bix-year limitation of actions applies to a cause of action on such a bond. Order affirmed. The opinion was written by Justice Hallam.