Connolly v. Conlan
371 N.W.2d 832, 1985 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 1086 (1985)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The Iowa Dram Shop Act, Iowa Code § 123.92, provides the exclusive civil remedy against liquor licensees and permittees, thereby preempting common-law tort claims for acts outside the statute, such as the illegal sale of alcohol to a minor.
Facts:
- A tavern owner-operator, the defendant, served intoxicating liquor or beer to two youths.
- The defendant allegedly knew that the youths were minors at the time of the sale.
- The petition alleged the sale was wanton, reckless, and malicious.
- After being served by the defendant, one of the youths, the plaintiffs' decedent, was killed in a single-vehicle motor vehicle accident.
Procedural Posture:
- The representatives of the decedent (plaintiffs) filed a wrongful death action against a tavern owner-operator (defendant) in a state trial court.
- The complaint included claims based on a common-law theory of recovery, alleging the defendant was negligent in selling alcohol to a minor.
- The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the common-law claims.
- The trial court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss, ruling that the dram shop act is the exclusive remedy against licensees.
- The plaintiffs (appellants) sought, and the Iowa Supreme Court granted, an interlocutory appeal to review the trial court's dismissal.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the Iowa Dram Shop Act, Iowa Code § 123.92, provide the exclusive remedy against liquor licensees for alcohol-related injuries, thereby preempting a common-law negligence claim against a tavern for illegally selling intoxicants to a minor?
Opinions:
Majority - Harris, J.
Yes. The Iowa Dram Shop Act provides the exclusive remedy against liquor licensees and preempts common-law negligence claims for selling alcohol to a minor. The legislature, in revising the dram shop law, created a comprehensive scheme for licensees. This scheme struck a balance: licensees are subject to strict liability and must post financial responsibility, but in return, their liability is limited to serving persons who are already intoxicated or to the point of intoxication. The legislature's choice to limit liability to these specific circumstances preempts the field, and the court is bound to adhere to this legislative plan, even if social policies might support expanded liability.
Dissenting - Schultz, J.
No. The Dram Shop Act should not preempt a common-law action against a licensee for illegally selling alcohol to a minor. The majority's interpretation creates an inconsistent and illogical result where a for-profit tavern owner is immune from liability for selling to a minor, while a social host, as established in prior case law, is not. The Act does not explicitly state it preempts the entire tort field. Preemption should only apply where a common-law claim is identical to the statutory remedy (serving an already intoxicated person), not for a distinct wrong like serving a minor. Ascribing an intent to the legislature to provide greater protection to commercial purveyors of alcohol than to social hosts is contrary to the stated public policy of protecting public safety.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the doctrine of legislative preemption in Iowa's dram shop jurisprudence, establishing that the statutory remedy is exclusive for liquor licensees. It creates a clear, albeit controversial, line between the liability of commercial licensees and that of other individuals, such as social hosts. By shielding licensees from common-law claims for acts like selling to minors, the ruling immunizes them from liability for a category of wrongful conduct, prioritizing the legislative liability scheme over broader common-law tort principles. This creates a legal anomaly where a for-profit entity has less potential liability than a private citizen in similar circumstances, a point the dissent argues is contrary to legislative intent and public policy.
