Chapman v. Craig
Iowa Supreme Court
431 N.W.2d 770 (1988)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
Randall Burkhead went to the Main Street Tap, a bar operated by William Craig (bar operator) (defendant), where Burkhead was served several alcoholic drinks. Burkhead then went to the Southfork Restaurant & Lounge, operated by Gary and Glenda Rogers (bar operators) (defendants), where Burkhead was served more alcoholic drinks. When Burkhead would not leave the Southfork, a Southfork employee called the police. After Officer Timothy Chapman arrived on the scene, Burkhead left the bar, and Chapman arrested Burkhead outside. During the arrest, Chapman was injured. Chapman filed a dram-shop action against all the bar operators. The trial court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the bar operators, holding that the fireman’s rule barred Chapman from filing suit against the bar operators. Chapman appealed, arguing that a number of jurisdictions have abandoned the fireman’s rule, the Iowa Supreme Court had recently adopted comparative negligence and abolished assumption of the risk, and the fireman’s rule violated the Equal Protection Clause.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Schultz, J.)
Dissent (Larson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
