This whole thing still baffles me.
1. She was underage and was willingly drinking anyway
2. She made the choice to break the law and jaywalk
3. She got hit. Driver wasn't intoxicated (at least not that the article said)
4. And the fraternity gets sued because they served her alcohol?!
Since everyone is just suing random people, I think the driver should counter-sue because since she was jay-walking, she caused endagerment to him in his car. He could have been hurt!
Seriously, this makes no sense!
Threaded Mode