It was a matter of time. Josh Hancock’s father is suing Mike Shannon’s restaurant, claiming in was negligent in serving alcohol to the Cardinals’ pitcher, who died in an auto accident last month.
As of now, Hancock’s father isn’t suing the Cardinals or MLB.
Accountability, obviously, isn’t an issue. Never mind Hancock was drinking a few days earlier when he was involved in a minor accident. Never mind he was well over the league limit. Never mind he was speeding. Never mind he was on a cell phone.
Do you sue the liquor company? Do you sue the trucking company that brought the liquor to the restaurant? Do you sue the manufacturer of Hancock’s vehicle?
Why doesn’t Hancock Sr. sue himself for not teaching his son better?
The bottom line is it is Hancock’s responsibility.
15 Comments
John, I think your comments about Mr Hancock Sr are very out of line and need to be retracted. The man lost his son very recently and is in the mourning process. Maybe trying to find blame is a way for him to survive mentally, and maybe the restaurant served him when it shouldn’t have. We don’t know the details or the laws in every state. How do you know what he taught his son . Was his son an alcoholic? Do you not beleive alcoholism to be a disease. I am very concerned about your comment. You have basically thru a mental assault on every parent who has lost a child from alcohol How about an apology and sticking to baseball?
I don’t think it’s out of line. Today’s society is way too “sue-happy.” It’s not an assault on every parent who’s lost a child though, because not every parent does it. In fact most probably don’t. If Hancock’s father needs an outlet for his frustration the good people at MADD could provide many different ones for him, and they would all be far more constructive and a lot less self serving…
If Hancock had killed others here would it still be out of line to question him? Would his father still be suing these establishments? The only reason why he didn’t take innocent lives with him is because he got lucky, and probably on quite a few occasions…
I think everyone should sue everyone else. Most people are small potatoes though
I believe that since the lawsuit has been filed, we can assume that the mourning period is over.
What surprises me is not only did the father sue the restaurant, but also the tow truck driver and the other car owner whose vehicles Hancock ran into. Is this a legal move to protect the Hancock family or a way to spread the blame.
josh hancock was what? 29 yrs old,this wasnt some dumb impressionable kid. His dad is in my opinion an idiot. Maybe he figures if he sues enough people someone will settle. I dont know and I kind of dont care. His dad should be bummed about his sons death,no doubt about that,but he should be relieved his son didnt bring anyone else six feet under with him.
I’ve said it once and i’ll say it again,we live in an extremely greedy world that is run by money.
I hope none of you ever lose a child. For your information and to prevent you from being assholes whem you deal with someone who has lost a child the mourning period IS NEVER OVER. Maybe Yankee fans aren’t as arrogant as Mets fans afterall.
mel:
what is your deal? Hancock was a 29 year old who decided to drink and drive. Sure i feel for his family, but that doesnt mean his dad should sue the bar, absolutely ridiculous.
Also Mel: I hope you never get hit by a drunk driver like i was. Luckily i survived, not many can say the same.
One- Hancock´s dad probably has a ton of money because of his son, and he´s suing people who are probably worth a lot less than his son´s estate.
Two- I hope the tow truck company sues hancock´s estate.
Three—How about some personal responsibility??? Is it always someone else´s fault?
I´m sick of the lawsuit frenzy…
Mel,
From your comments, it appears you have lost a child in a similar fashion. However, the point here is that by suing an establishment that serves drinks, by suing a tow truck driver-
one who was performing his job and was hit-, and suing the stranded driver shows that he is either a. looking for money or b. looking to protect his son’s legacy—one that was damaged by endangering his own life and others. He is, essentially, removing all responsibility from his son and from himself. Your kind of comments are enabling him to do so. JOSH drank all those beers, JOSH was speeding, JOSH was on the cell phone, JOSH was not wearing a seat belt, JOSH was not paying attention.For you to direct your anger or whatever at people on this blog and hold some kind of moral authority shows that YOU are the arrogant one or lack the intelligence or foresight to see that Josh Hancock was a spoiled (near) millionaire who thought he was invincible
John I don’t think you have to retract your comments at all. First of all, the reason people read your blog is that you take an honest, pull-no-punches approach. Your readers respect that.
Secondly, I belive that many people, including myself, agree with your opinions. It is indeed a tragedy that Josh Hancock died at such a young age. I feel deep sympathy for his family. However, it is also a tragedy that Josh brought this on himself by doing everything wrong. Hopefully other people will learn from his mistakes and other lives can be saved. But suing a bar, which offered him a tax that he refused, is completely absurd. It is sad that people refuse to take responsibility for their own actions these days, and that they are always trying to blame others. That’s what seems to be happening here.
1) Mel, you’re way out of line.
2) Terrible personal loss does not give you a free pass. Some people may look the other way with certain behavior, but this lawsuit goes well beyond that.
3) By filing this lawsuit Josh’s father has done one thing…guarantee that Josh’s behavior and reputation will be destroyed in the courts as the defendants attack this ridiculous lawsuit. And the only one’s to blame are Josh and his father.
4) Drunk, speeding, on a cellphone, in a rental car, late at night, with no seatbelt on = Josh’s responsibility, and no one else.
Mel: Shame on You.
Josh Hancock’s father’s response may be indicative of how he raised his kid. With comments such as yours, you surely seem like an enabler of zero accountabilty. Maybe he should also sue the state for creating the roadway.
Does Mike Shannon’s restaurant have any accountability when it serves alcohol to someone for 3.5 hours until their blood-alcohol level is twice the legal limit? It’s great that they offered him a taxi, but what message were they sending society when they allowed him to go out to his car when he refused it?
Sure, Hancock was irresponsible—but what did the bar do to prevent an easily foreseeable disaster? It seems to me that you can’t profit off altering someone’s sobriety and then not take responsibility when that lack of sobriety becomes harmful.
The other aspect we seem to be glossing over here is the connection between Mike Shannon and the Cardinals, and how his establishment is something of an off-campus haven for the team.
May none of you all lose a son but if you do, whatever behavior you use to try to survuive I hope you get more sympathy than you have shown Mr Hancock. Maybe the suit is the wrong thing to do. In such a short time, he probably doesn’t know what to do and is being given too much advice from too many people. But John John Delcos went way too far when he says Hancock should sue himself. John has indicted every parent who has lost a child to drugs and alcohol, and it is far too large a number in this country. If none of you can see that then I feel bad for all of you and hope you never have to see it first hand.
Yes Hancock was at fault and yes he is the one who needs to be held accountable but to insult a mourning parent is in my opinion very offensive to thousands upon thousands of good parents.
And for all you briiant assumers who know my history, I didn’t lose a child but have too many friends who have to drugs and drink and none of them deserve a comment like John made.
And also remember just a few weeks earlier when LaRussa was DUIed, it was treated like a joke by baseball and the press. Maybe if LaRussa would have been dealt with harshly, Hancock would have had a wake up call, maybe he’d have gone to AA with La Russa or something and be alive today. Based on LaRussa’s comments after the death the Cardinals definitely knew about the problems and their answer was for an unpunished offender to chat with him.
It would be nice to talk baseball, but apparently we can’t.
how bout people just take personal responsibility instead of always looking to pass the buck. Josh hancock is a grown man who knew the dangers of drinking and driving and smoking the “herb”. If you ask me they should just let sleeping dogs lie and ge happy that josh didnt kill anyone else while driving. But no not when there’s money to be had by mr. hancock. Im guessing the next step is probably a book or something. If mr. hancock really cared maybe he should try and get involved in educating young kids about drinking and driving,or he could just try and fatten his pockets. Either way I dont care about this anymore.