Courtroom Observation Paper

Courtroom Observation Paper

Case Facts

In this case, White v Gibbs and O'Malley's Tavern, Mrs. Deborah White is the plaintiff and Mr. Patrick Gibbs, a bartender at O'Malley's Tavern, is the defendant. This case stemmed from the following incident: Mr. and Mrs. White were having dinner at O'Malley's Tavern. Also at the tavern was a former lover of Mrs. White--Mr. Edward Hard. Mr. Hard had been drinking heavily. When Mr. and Mrs. White left O'Malley's, Mr. Hard staggered out behind them. After getting into his van, he chased the couple's car out of the parking lot. Almost half a mile later, he rammed into the side of their car. Mr. White was killed instantly. Mrs. White was seriously injured.

Parties' Arguments

The arguments of the parties are as follows: The defendants, Mr. Gibbs (and the tavern), requested a summary judgment from the court. Mrs. White, the plaintiff, wanted the court to deny their request. She wanted the case to go to trial.

When a summary judgment is granted, a case can be resolved rather quickly since no trial is involved. The defendants wanted this type of judgment because they felt that there were no issues of fact that needed to be tried. They felt that the essential issues had already been settled. Therefore, no trial was necessary (Summary Judgment). Their claim was that they were not at fault because there was no supporting evidence to show that Mr. Gibbs knew Mr. Hard was intoxicated.

Mrs. White, the plaintiff, felt quite the contrary. Her claim was that Mr. Gibbs did, in fact, know and could see that Mr. Hard was intoxicated. On top of that, Mr. Gibbs was well aware of how much and how many alcoholic beverages Mr. Hard had drank while he was at the tavern. This would make it obvious that he was intoxicated. Based on these facts, Mrs. White asked the court to deny the defendants' request for a summary judgment.

Biblical Worldview

According to the biblical worldview, I think this (suing someone in court) is a good method for resolving disputes--but only if the disputes pertain to criminal acts--not civil issues. (This case between Mrs. White and Mr. Gibbs is of a criminal nature.) However, if the parties are Christians, and their issues are civil, they should not be resolved in a courtroom.

1 Corinthians 6:1-2 states, "If one of your members has done something wrong to another one, do you dare to have the case decided by judges who are unbelievers, and not by God's people? Don't you know that God's people are going to judge the world? And so, since you're going to judge the world, aren't you good enough to serve as judges...?" (Anderson, 1990). In other words, as a Christian, you should not file suit against someone who is also a Christian. The issue in dispute should be mediated by an intelligent Christian or group of Christians (Christians and Lawsuits).

As previously stated, this particular case is a criminal one. Hence, going to court is OK. However, I feel this should only be done as a last resort.

Before going to court, Mary Fairchild summed my feelings up in a nutshell when she stated, if you have "followed the biblical pattern, sought the Lord in prayer and submitted to solid spiritual counsel, yet there seems to be no other way to resolve the matter, then pursing legal action may be the proper course. Whatever you decide, do it carefully