Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsWednesday, March 5, 2008 2:21 PM CST
Lawsuits filed against bar, 3 drivers tied to fatal crash
Advertisement

BLOOMINGTON -- The family of a man killed in an auto accident last year and a woman who was injured in the crash have filed a pair of lawsuits against a Bloomington bar and three drivers involved in the collision.

DeJuan Lockwood, 25, a passenger in a car driven by Octavius Johnson, was killed in the two-vehicle accident March 10 at East Empire Street and Veterans Parkway on the city’s east side. A second passenger, Ashanti Hubbard, was injured in the crash. Hubbard’s sister, Tiana Hubbard, also suffered serious injuries in the accident.

Johnson, 25, is serving 10 years in prison for aggravated driving under the influence of alcohol related to the accident.

Named in the lawsuits, along with Johnson, is Fat Jack’s tavern and drivers Cortney Shipp and Ryan Arnold. Shipp testified at Johnson’s trial in November that she and Johnson were racing and cutting each other off as the two drove east on Empire Street. Johnson’s car collided with Arnold’s northbound car at Veterans Parkway.

Fat Jack’s is named in the civil action under the state’s Dram Shop law that relates to the sale of alcohol. The bar is accused of selling alcohol to Johnson, Shipp and Arnold that contributed to the fatal collision.

The wrongful death complaint filed by Lockwood’s mother, Margaret Sims against Johnson accuses the driver of operating his car negligently while under the influence of drugs and alcohol. Shipp also is accused of negligent driving and encouraging Johnson to engage in a high speed chase before the accident.

Lockwood’s mother names Arnold in a wrongful death claim for driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol, failing to avoid the collision and failing to sound his horn. Police said after the accident that Arnold had been drinking but no criminal charges were filed against him.

Sims seeks more than $50,000 on behalf of Lockwood’s family.

Hubbard’s legal action accuses Johnson, Shipp and Arnold of similar negligence that contributed to the accident.

She seeks more than $50,000 for losses that included medical expenses, lost wages, permanent disability and disfigurement.

Hearing dates have not been set in the lawsuits. Hubbard is represented by John Q. Fitzpatrick, and Sims has retained Richard L. Grossman, both of Chicago.

Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 11 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

A Friend wrote on Mar 5, 2008 4:18 PM:

" Sorry for you law school wannabee's, but the bar is legally and morally responsible for oveserving a customer. The theory that the place is too big doesn't hols up. If it is big, you hire more people. When you talk abouty accepting responsibility you have to make sure everyone accepts it. Now accept yours and stop spreading false information. "

Paladin wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:22 PM:

" ...folks, the guy who is in prison WAS drunk. That is why he is in prison. Police determined that one of the other drivers was NOT drunk, which is why they didn't arrest him. Is that the bar's fault? Could be. That is what the lawsuit is supposed to determine. Bars shouldn't be ignorant. They know the rules. If they choose to flirt with the consequences, for a few extra bucks, then they rolled their dice and took their chances, like any Vegas gambler. If they end up being liable, I won't cry myself to sleep. It's about time the bars started to hire some responsible and knowledgable people, rather than "pretty people" for the bar, and "big people" for "security" (whether they can spell the word, or not)... "

The Cats wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:17 PM:

" To Annienap...so you would allow bar owners and employees to serve alcohol to someone until they drank themselves to death? What a silly argument. They own a license and with that license comes the responsibility to monitor the amount of alcohol their customers consume. If they don't want the responsibility then they should not acquire the license. As to suing for damages how dare you presume to know what the motive for these lawsuits is. Who in the world do you think you are? "

chickster wrote on Mar 5, 2008 2:00 PM:

" Take responsibility - it has nothing to do with the bar - the drivers were racing and acting crazy - they should be accountable not the bar! "

newshound wrote on Mar 5, 2008 12:11 PM:

" Sounds like they are sueing the person they hit. Failing to avoid a collision and failing to sound their horn. Give me a break. It was the car YOU were in obviously out of control. You were racing....remember???? If I ever get ready to be plowed into by a person in the blink of an eye, I will remeber to sound my horn as that will make it all better...:( "

Gov't Oppressed Mule wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:59 AM:

" TOUCHE ANNIENAP! Personal responsibility is a dead phrase. "

Dave wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:35 AM:

" Maybe bars and drinkers should sign legal wavers that says they don't hold each other responsible for getting drunk and doing stupid things? "

4moore wrote on Mar 5, 2008 10:48 AM:

" Annienap.......I agree! "

JimmyChooGirl wrote on Mar 5, 2008 9:56 AM:

" I could understand if it was a small bar and there were maybe 5 people inside and this guy (the convicted driver) was passed out on the bar stool and the bartender continued to serve him - I can see some responsibility to the bar on that. BUT at a place like Fat Jacks, where there are 50 people crowded around the bar trying to get drinks, the bartenders don't have time to analyze each person on their "drunkeness". If you are 21 years old and mentally stable (if not you should not be drinking) then you are 100 % responsible for getting behind the wheel of a vehicle while intoxicated!!! "

candy wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:41 AM:

" WHEN will we start holding people accountable for their own actions?? It is not the bar's fault this guy was racing? "

Annienap wrote on Mar 5, 2008 6:28 AM:

" I'm all for prohibition myself, BUT I've always thought it is outrageous to be able to sue a tavern for selling what the state gives it a license to sell. If the tavern doesn't sell the alcohol to a patron, there can be trouble resulting in injury to employees or the tavern owner. If the tavern does sell to a patron, the tavern owner gets sued if there is a serious injury or fatal accident. My opinion is that this is only a 'get rich' scheme for those who sue the taverns. It's sad that anyone would use a person's death to make money, especially family members. "

Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?