Ryan, J. I dissent. Eschewing the constitutional analysis for which leave was granted in this case, this Court nevertheless holds that the "name and retain” amendment 1 to the dramshop act applies only to those plaintiffs who know the identity of the intoxicated person. The result, of course, is the creation by judicial fiat of an excepti…
Read the full opinion (source) ↗
Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.