Metropolitan News-Enterprise

 

Wednesday, September 14, 2022

 

Page 1

 

No Liability to Patrons Who Were Injured in Bar Room Brawl, C.A. Declares

Segal Says Summary Judgment Was Properly Awarded

 

By a MetNews Staff Writer

 

Depicted above is Boardner’s, a Hollywood bar and night club. The Court of Appeal held yesterday that the owners bear no responsibility for injuries incurred by patrons in an altercation.

 

The owners of a Hollywood bar/night club were properly granted summary judgment in an action against it by two men who were injured by acquaintances when a fight broke out, the Court of Appeal for this district declared yesterday, rejecting the plaintiffs’ theory that harm to them would have been averted if more security guards had been employed.

Justice John L. Segal of Div. Seven authored the opinion which was not certified for publication. Segal agreed with Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Kristin S. Escalante that plaintiffs Jonny and Lacey Sculls failed to show that defendant Boardners, Inc., which operates Boardner’s, off Hollywood Boulevard, is liable to them.

They were injured during an event dubbed “bar sinister” held every Saturday night.

“There is no evidence whatsoever that Boardners knew of aggressive behavior among the parties prior to the incident,” Segal wrote. “Any speculation that Boardners could have anticipated the altercation or that additional security guards would have prevented any injuries was just that—speculation.”

He spelled out:

“The Sculls argued that Boardners should have hired additional security guards. Such a security measure is, under the authorities cited, considered particularly burdensome on the proprietor, and requires a heightened degree of foreseeability of criminal activity on the premises….Thus, the Sculls were required to show a high likelihood that additional security guards were necessary to protect against altercations of this sort.

“In its summary judgment papers, Boardners demonstrated that physical altercations were not foreseeable, as there had been only a handful of undefined incidents in the past. Boardners employed four trained and certified security guards at different locations within the club.”

The plaintiffs argued that there was a triable issue as to the competence of the guards it employs. Segal said the defendant produced sufficient evidence to show that it hires only experienced guards who are annually trained and certified.

The case is Sculls v. Boardners, Inc., B309933.

 

Copyright 2022, Metropolitan News Company