Brian Martin Case Brief

The plaintiff, Brian Martin was attending a high school graduation party on July 9, 2000, hosted by Lee Martin to celebrate his daughter’s graduation. While at the party, Brian Martin was attacked with a baseball bat by Chijoke Okere. As the night went on, there were about 70 people present. Although most of the guests were between the ages of seventeen and twenty, there were two kegs as well as other alcohol brought by guests. Martin admits he did have about six beers from the keg that night. One of the guests, Matthew Marciano had a history with Martin. While at the party a fight began between Marciano and the plaintiff’s friends. Martin told Marciano to leave after the fight continue in the street. Marciano left but returned about an hour

Holding: The court holds that Defendant Martin did have a duty to protect her guests from unreasonable harm by other guests and third persons.
Reasoning: Volpe v. Gallagher determined that the legal duty is a question of the court. These decisions will be based on a case-by- case basis. In examining this case, the question surrounds Lee Martin’s duty of care to the plaintiff. Although landowners do not have a duty to protect those from dangerous or illegal acts of a third party, there is an exception when the plaintiff and defendant bear a special relationship, Luoni v. Berube (2000). According to Grisham v. John Q Long (1988), a special relationship exists between people who provide alcohol and the people who drink it. The defendant served alcohol illegal to underaged individuals therefore, the plaintiff did have a reasonable duty of care to protect the plaintiff from harm at the hands of fellow guests. The defendant is not excused of this duty under Ferreira v. Strack (1995) because, although the serious implications outlined in that case can excuse a defendant of duty, what occurred at Defendant Martin’s house was not consider a serious implication that she could not control by the courts. The Defendant owed every guest at the party a higher duty of care because she was serving alcohol to people underaged, according to Rhode Island statutes. The defendant may not have known of Okere’s presence at the party, however, the atmosphere the defendant created could be considered violent. Because of that atmosphere, she should have taken reasonable steps to ensure none of her guests would be harmed. The violence was foreseeable according to Ballard v. Uribe (1986). According to Pollard v. Powers (2000) the defendant did not have to directly foresee what type of harm would happen, only that some type of harm may occur. It is foreseeable that any of the underage