CHARLESTON, W.Va. — An Indiana bar had no way of knowing a fight would break out in the parking lot outside, leading to the blinding of Eric Porterfield, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled.
Porterfield is now a delegate in West Virginia’s Legislature. He sued Cavanaugh’s Sports Bar & Eatery over a brawl that left him blind.
Last week, most members of Indiana’s Supreme Court concluded, “Under the criminal act at issue in this particular scenario, Cavanaugh’s owed no duty to protect its patron from the sudden parking lot brawl when no evidence shows that Cavanaugh’s knew the fight was impending.”
The Indiana Supreme Court heard arguments in October to consider whether to hear a full appeal after two lower levels of the Indiana court system denied summary judgment on behalf of the bar. The Supreme Court remanded the case and instructed the trial court to ener a summary judgment for Cavanaugh’s.
The incident happened in 2006.
Porterfield went on to move to Princeton, West Virginia, opened a religious organization called “Blind Faith Ministries” and, in 2018, ran for the House of Delegates. He came in second in a three-seat race in the General Election and became the second blind person to serve in West Virginia’s Legislature.
Once seated as a delegate, he generated controversy.
During a committee meeting, Porterfield claimed that LGBTQ rights organizations are “the most socialist group in this country.” Porterfield in a subsequent newspaper interview said “LGBTQ is a modern-day version of the Ku Klux Klan.” And then when a television interviewer asked what he would do if he found out his children were gay, Porterfield responded he would “make sure they could swim.”
Porterfield was severely injured in a 3 a.m. fight in 2006 outside the bar. A friend who accompanied Porterfield made an objectionable comment to a female patron as the crowd was leaving and wound up in a fight with the woman’s boyfriend and others. Porterfield got into the fight and had his eyes gouged, a permanent injury.
Porterfield’s personal injury lawsuit contended the bar failed to take reasonable care for his safety.
Lawyers for Cavanaugh’s have claimed that the bar had no duty to protect Porterfield because its managers and staff had no way of knowing patrons would behave violently after leaving. According to testimony, the fight was among five similar incidents at the bar.
The Supreme Court’s majority said in its ruling, “the ‘critical inquiry is to answer whether the criminal attack was foreseeable.”
Indiana Supreme Court justices concluded that the bar had no way of knowing a fight was imminent and, therefore, could not be held responsible for Porterfield’s life-changing injury.
“The skirmish occurred suddenly and without warning: for hours Porterfield and his friend socialized with bartenders and had no animosity with any other customers. Indeed, no evidence suggests any tension in the bar before the fight.”