Has there ever been a successful lawsuit settlement against a
government, distillery and/or brewery for promotion of alcohol which was
seen to have led to a litigant's alcoholism and/or related troubles?

Hello wetinterests-ga,

At the outset, I should emphasize the important disclaimer at the
bottom of this page, which notes that answers provided on Google
Answers are general information, and are not intended to substitute
for informed professional legal advice.  If you need a professional
legal opinion on this subject, you should contact an attorney in your
area.

I have found brief descriptions of the kind of case you are looking
for.  In Brune v. Brown Forman Corp., 758 S.W.2d 827 (Tex. Ct. App.
1988), "the Court of Appeals of Texas ruled that it was up to a jury
to decide whether a tequila maker had a duty to warn consumers about
the danger of alcohol poisoning."

"Prohibitionism Goes To Court" (August 1995)
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/research_memorandum_9.htm

This court "refus[ed] to rule that 'the general public is aware that
the consumption of an excessive amount of alcohol can result in
death,' thus precluding summary judgment in tequila overdose case,
with a resulting $1.5 million jury verdict, see WALL ST. J., Oct. 1,
1992, at B8)."

Collapsing Torts", by Nicolas P. Terry (25 Conn. L. Rev. 717 (1993))
[under FN196, page 50 of the PDF file]
Saint Louis University School of Law
http://law.slu.edu/nicolasterry/NTProf/collapsing.pdf

According to the Manhattan Institute article, the court in Brune cited
another case, Hon v. Stroh Brewery, 835 F.2d 510 (3d Cir. 1987), where
"in 1987 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that a
jury should be allowed to determine whether the risks of prolonged but
relatively moderate consumption of beer are in fact 'generally
known.'"

According to another articalle, the court in Hon held that the "jury
could infer from defendant's ads associating moderate drinking with
'healthy, robust activities' that [the] public was unaware of moderate
drinking’s possible hazards".  The court went on to cite cases
"holding that advertising can neutralize warnings and lead to product
liability."

"Liquid Honesty: The First Amendment Right to Market the Health
Benefits of Moderate Alcohol Consumption", by Erik Bierbauer (October
1999) [footnote 188, page 41 of PDF file]
New York University Law
Reviewhttp://www.nyu.edu/pages/lawreview/74/4/bierbauer.pdf

I do not know whether this case resulted in a settlement or a victory
before the jury, but in light of the similar Brune case, I suppose
that it is possible.

I hope that this information is helpful.

- justaskscott-ga


Search terms used on Google:

lawsuit alcoholism advertising
"garrison v heublein"
"hon v stroh"
"brune v brown"