- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Fred's Bar lawsuit over patron fight death moves forward...
Posted on 8/12/25 at 12:16 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
Posted on 8/12/25 at 12:16 pm to RanchoLaPuerto
quote:
Throw one out and make the other call an Uber. Or send out a man-mountain with them to keep them from killing each other in the parking lot.
So forcing the other to call an Uber and not allowing them outside could qualify as kidnapping, correct?
0
Posted on 8/12/25 at 12:16 pm to slidingstop
The Fred’s staff had a flag football team at that new place on Burbank (Fred’s was the primary sponsor). Their QB pulled his hamstring rolling out early in the game and all of them were pissing themselves laughing and literally not one of them went to go check on him to see if he was ok, our team checked on him first. QB just up and left after that.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 12:22 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
Not having followed this at all, but what’s the status of the Marsiglia kid’s trial?
I think he lives out of state now, but was indicted for manslaughter by a grand jury last year around Thanksgiving. So it might be a while before his trial.
This post was edited on 8/12/25 at 12:25 pm
Posted on 8/12/25 at 12:23 pm to LSUtiger89
quote:
What 26 year old is having their bachelor party going to Fred’s?
If this guy didn’t get himself killed fighting college kids he surely would have been at Red Dress Run this past weekend throwing haymakers outside of tropical isle.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 12:29 pm to jbgleason
It’s embarsssong as hell charges were brought against the play student here. Hillar is a pussy
Posted on 8/12/25 at 12:33 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
The new contributory negligence law that just passed will likely cut down on these types of suits.
Never been a fan of contributory neg. Comparative just seems more just to me, though I can stomach modified comparative. If contributory neg was applied perfectly by every court it would bar almost every claim.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 12:34 pm to Obtuse1
It’s really modified comparative at 51%. It still will likely stop these kinds of suits.
We don’t anymore, but we used to have it on the books that the jury could not hear whether you were wearing your seatbelt. This was a direct result of the old contributory negligence scheme where not wearing your seatbelt leading to even a 1% allocation of fault would totally bar recovery.
quote:
If contributory neg was applied perfectly by every court it would bar almost every claim.
We don’t anymore, but we used to have it on the books that the jury could not hear whether you were wearing your seatbelt. This was a direct result of the old contributory negligence scheme where not wearing your seatbelt leading to even a 1% allocation of fault would totally bar recovery.
This post was edited on 8/12/25 at 12:37 pm
Posted on 8/12/25 at 12:44 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
It’s really modified comparative at 51%. It still will likely stop these kinds of suits.
That is palatable to me. Somehow, I practice in 4 of the 5 jurisdictions that use contributory. I suppose LA will be the second modified comparative joining SC but SC compares plaintiff to the sum of all defendants.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 1:13 pm to Havoc
quote:
That’s pretty fricking stupid.
You know what? You are right. I posted this while taking a nasty dump. I admit I was a dumbass in that moment.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 1:23 pm to Dizz
quote:
I am sure Fred's has rigorous bouncer training and defined policies and procedures for dealing with these situations.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 1:24 pm to lsupride87
quote:should be a MUCH bigger story
It’s embarsssong as hell charges were brought against the play student here. Hillar is a pussy
Posted on 8/12/25 at 1:31 pm to lsuchip30
quote:
It's the Louisiana lawyer way - whoever has the most money is gonna get sued.
Lawyers are what is wrong with this state.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 1:33 pm to jbgleason
It’s hard for me to fathom a fair system that would result in Fred’s or Mansiglia having any price to pay in the end. Maybe I’m wired wrong but if you asked me what I would expect if I:
• went to a bar,
• got drunk as frick,
• started a fight with someone where I’m clearly the aggressor,
• got shoved and by total freak accident hit my head, received a traumatic brain injury,
• and ultimately died,
I would tell you it’s my own damn fault. Maybe I didn’t “deserve” it strictly speaking… it’s pretty fricking unlucky to die as a result of that, and I think we would all consider it a fair outcome if I just got my arse whipped and went home with minor injuries.
But why should the people I victimized have to pay for my misfortune that resulted squarely from my own actions. Hello? Can we stop for one sec and think about what that world looks like lol. The point of having rights and redress isn’t to protect you for behaving like an antisocial POS, it’s to ensure that we don’t wrongly punish innocent people or leave innocent people out to dry financially.
This is quintessential FAFO
• went to a bar,
• got drunk as frick,
• started a fight with someone where I’m clearly the aggressor,
• got shoved and by total freak accident hit my head, received a traumatic brain injury,
• and ultimately died,
I would tell you it’s my own damn fault. Maybe I didn’t “deserve” it strictly speaking… it’s pretty fricking unlucky to die as a result of that, and I think we would all consider it a fair outcome if I just got my arse whipped and went home with minor injuries.
But why should the people I victimized have to pay for my misfortune that resulted squarely from my own actions. Hello? Can we stop for one sec and think about what that world looks like lol. The point of having rights and redress isn’t to protect you for behaving like an antisocial POS, it’s to ensure that we don’t wrongly punish innocent people or leave innocent people out to dry financially.
This is quintessential FAFO
Posted on 8/12/25 at 1:43 pm to jbgleason
quote:
is it the bar bouncers responsibility to monitor them after they eject them from the bar?
I would imagine the bouncers job is monitor the bar and manage any conflict that takes place inside the bar. If there is a fight in the bar, once the bouncer throws them out, its no longer his concern, but maybe if they are thrown out and the owner of the bar also owns the property they are own that could fall back on the owner? But my initial thought is that the bouncer has no responsibilities once he throws them out.
quote:
“These patrons were removed from Fred’s Bar and Grill already knowing that they were aggressive with one another,” he said. “And to throw them out together without any oversight, without any supervision, I believe that is a cause of action.”
I am not sure how this will turn out and I know this isn't legal terms, but if you are an adult you are responsible for your own actions. Why does a bar have to make sure the two parties go their separate ways. What if the bar throws them out, one takes off and stops to get gas. The other one passes by, sees the other one getting gas, he stops and they fight which results in someone's death. What will they say "the bar should have made sure they got in their vehicles and went opposite ways?
People are responsible for how much they drink and everything else should follow. The bar's job is to provide a safe as possible place for people to go and buy drinks, hang out with friends and dance.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 1:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
(2) No social host who owns, leases, or otherwise lawfully occupies premises on which, in his absence and without his consent, intoxicating beverages of either high or low alcoholic content are consumed by a person over the age for the lawful purchase thereof shall be liable to such person or to any other person or to the estate, successors, or survivors of either for any injury suffered off the premises
quote:
Seems like they're trying to create a loophole.
There’s no loop hole being created here. The injuring happened on the premises, just because it was outside the door does not matter. Dram shop immunity applies once the injured party leaves the premises. In this case Fred’s parking lot is still Fred’s premises.
Now, did they allege sufficient acts for negligence— I don’t think so. My guess is this gets dismissed on summary judgment because there’s a lot of video of it so the facts will be difficult to dispute.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 1:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SlowFlowPro
There’s no loophole
JFC you are a terrible lawyer
I would never hire you but I would love have my lawyers kick your arse
Posted on 8/12/25 at 2:00 pm to redstickrick
quote:
. In this case Fred’s parking lot is still Fred’s premises.
i am certain this not the first suit that has been attempted for events in tiger land parking lots
Now, i do not know for certain but I imagine the parking lot is under a different LLC from the bar and Fred's leases the lot
This is a different discussion but I am all for getting rid of or lowering parking requirements for bars. That would go a long way to keep the trash out of tigerland
Posted on 8/12/25 at 2:26 pm to The Torch
The biggest crime here is Marsiglia is in any trouble at all. Doesn't make sense.
They're saying you cannot defend yourself? The other guy threw the punch and Marsiglia just shoved him.
They're saying you cannot defend yourself? The other guy threw the punch and Marsiglia just shoved him.
Posted on 8/12/25 at 2:42 pm to boosiebadazz
We have modified comparative in Texas (land of NO frivolous lawsuits) and we see garbage claims all the time. Just need to sweat the insurer out before MSJ to get a cost of defense settlement or land in the right venue. Then you reptile the jury to believe a non-culpable corporate entity is a bloodthirsty profit machine.
This post was edited on 8/12/25 at 2:45 pm
Posted on 8/12/25 at 2:47 pm to jbgleason
Zero liability for Fred's.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News