Sheehy v. Big Flats Community Day

New York Court of Appeals · Torts

Tortsimplied private right of actionalcohol liabilitycommon-law negligenceBurns Jackson testPenal Law 260.20(4)General Obligations Law 11-100General Obligations Law 11-101

Facts

Seventeen-year-old Margaret Sheehy attended the Big Flats Community Days celebration and alleged that she was served several beers in a beer tent operated by American Legion without being asked for proof of age. A witness affidavit stated that she later reentered the tent, received additional beers while visibly intoxicated, then went to Driscoll's Tavern and was served another alcoholic beverage. When she attempted to cross the highway back to the celebration grounds, she was struck by a car and severely injured. She sued, alleging that the unlawful service of alcohol to her was a proximate cause of the accident.

Issue

Does Penal Law § 260.20(4), which criminalizes furnishing alcohol to a person under the legal purchase age, imply a private right of action for the intoxicated minor who is injured as a result of her own drinking? If not, can such a plaintiff recover against the alcohol provider under traditional common-law tort principles on this record?

Rule

Under the Burns Jackson test, a court considers whether the plaintiff is among the class for whose benefit the statute was enacted, whether a private right of action would promote the legislative purpose, and most importantly whether implying such a right would be consistent with the legislative scheme. Even where the first two factors are satisfied, no private right of action should be implied if doing so would conflict with the Legislature's chosen enforcement mechanism or overall statutory scheme. In addition, New York common law generally recognizes no duty running from a provider of alcohol to a person injured by his or her own voluntary intoxication.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Albany, 20-year-old Nina Torres was served vodka at a street fair by volunteers from Pine River Civic Club, even though she was under the legal purchase age. After leaving, she tripped off a curb and broke her ankle, then sued the club for damages based on the criminal statute prohibiting furnishing alcohol to underage persons.

Should a court imply a private right of action for Nina under the criminal statute?

Explanation. Under the Burns Jackson framework, the decisive question is whether implying a private right of action is consistent with the legislative scheme. Even if the underage plaintiff is within the protected class and civil liability might promote deterrence, no private right should be implied where the Legislature has already created alcohol-related civil remedies that withhold recovery from the intoxicated person. That inconsistency defeats the claim. (Derived from Sheehy v. Big Flats Community Day (n.d.).)