There are up to three types of witnesses in a dram shop case: the “lay witness,” the “independent expert witness,” and the “controlled expert witness.” According to Section 2 b. [4.8] of the Illinois Dramshop Practice Act handbook issued by the Illinois Institute for Continuing Legal Education (IICLE):
“Illinois Supreme Court Rule 213(f) establishes that a party must furnish the identity and location of all witnesses who will testify at trial together with the subject and basis of their testimony. A “lay witness” under S.Ct. Rule 213(f)(1) is a fact witness who will offer any fact or lay opinion testimony. This would include any opinions on intoxication.
An “independent expert witness” under Rule 213(f)(2) is a witness who is giving expert testimony but is not the party, the party’s current employee, or the party’s retained expert. This would encompass treating physicians, police witnesses, and any other witnesses not retained but offering expert opinions.
A “controlled expert witness” under Rule 213(f)(3) is an individual who is the party, the party’s current employee, or the party’s retained expert who is testifying to matters in his or her area of expertise. This would include any toxicologist retained by the dramshop defendant or plaintiff to refute or prove the intoxication or causation element under the Dramshop Act.”
It’s also important to remember that a lay witness’s testimony can be sufficient, as stated in Section 2 a. [4.7]:
“Illinois law clearly holds that a layperson’s opinion is sufficient to establish intoxication even if this opinion is rendered only by the plaintiff. Henry v. Bloomington Third Ward Community Club, 89 Ill.App.3d 106, 411 N.E.2d 540, 44 Ill.Dec. 418 (4th Dist. 1980). Proper bases for a lay opinion on intoxication include the presence or absence of the odor of alcohol, the appearance and demeanor of the alleged intoxicated person, the condition of the AIP’s eyes, the AIP’s speech, the AIP’s gait, indications of judgment and concentration, alertness or fatigue, and even the witness’ observation of previous occurrences of intoxication when used as foundation for the situation in question.
(Woodard v. Mainer, 167 Ill.App.3d 488, 521 N.E.2d 303, 118 Ill.Dec. 235 (5th Dist. 1988); Tate v. Coonce, 97 Ill.App.3d 145, 421 N.E.2d 1385, 52 Ill.Dec. 313 (3d Dist. 1981); Hagopian v. First Venture, Ltd., 90 Ill.App.3d 951, 414 N.E.2d 85, 46 Ill.Dec. 363 (1st Dist. 1980); Suppe v. Sako, 311 Ill.App. 459, 36 N.E.2d 603 (2d Dist. 1941)).”
If you or a loved one has been injured due to the negligence of an intoxicated person, we will help you pursue damages against the person/s directly responsible for the accident, and if the dram shop had supplied excessive alcohol to the at-fault party, that establishment may be legally liable for your compensation.
We are proud to serve our fellow citizens in personal injury cases, especially when you or a loved one has been injured in an accident due to another’s negligence. We see you as a person, not just a client – and that makes us better at the work we do. We listen. We learn your story. And, as we help you get the money you deserve, we go above and beyond in a way most law firms never could and never would. Because we’re not just lawyers. And you’re not just a client. We’re friends, neighbors, family. We’re all people and here at America’s Consumer Lawyer, we put People, First.
Helping our clients is about counseling, advocating, and ultimately solving problems. With years of experience successfully representing the people, not the powerful, we will take care of the insurance adjusters, your medical bills, your property damage, and your lost wages, and monitor your treatment so you can focus on healing and getting your life back to normal. Our unique formula has earned us over 900 outstanding client reviews on our website, an A+ BBB rating, and over 120 five-star reviews on Google. Call 888-572-0176, e-mail us at michael@agrusslawfirm.com, or schedule a meeting with us here. We’re here 24/7.
