Commonwealth v Koczwara case brief (397 Pa. 575)

Commonwealth v Koczwara
397 Pa. 575, 155 A.2d 825, 1959 Pa. 493
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1959

FACTS
-Bartender sold liquor to minors.
-The owner of the bar (D) was not present, and testimony was given to support D had no knowledge of the acts claimed.
-Owner had previously been found guilty of a similar violation.

Issue: Whether the sale of liquor to minors by a bartender (employee of D), without the D’s presence, supports a finding of a violation of the liquor code?

Holding: No

PROCEDURAL HISTORY
-Conviction for violation of liquor code in Pennsylvania: 3 months jail sentence and fine of $500.
-Affirmed as to the fine, vacated the jail term.

RULES
An employer if he consents to, approves, or participates in unlawful acts is criminally liable for those acts committed by the employees.

ANALYSIS
-The legislature, consistent with due process, can establish absolute criminal liability. The law is clear in this case, that the owner is subject to vicarious liability for illegal acts committed by his servants,

“it shall be unlawful for any person, by himself, or by an employee or agent, . . . directly or indirectly.”

-The intent of the legislature was to eliminate the common law requirement of a mens rea, and place a high degree of responsibility upon the holder of a liquor license. However, it would be unthinkable to impose vicarious liability over onto true crimes, and by sentencing the D to 3 mos, which would make the offense a true crime.  The court realizes that even a meticulous employer cannot supervise every single act of his/her employees.

MINORITY OPINION
-If a man is liable even if he sells to a minor, not knowing he is a minor.
-When one man sells to a minor, unbeknownst to the master, the employer should not be liable vicariously for that act. 

FURTHER STUDY
See Vicarious Liability: applies to hold one person liable for the actions of another when engaged in some form of joint or collective activity.

From Wikipedia.org:  In Commonwealth v. Koczwara, the defendant was the licensed operator of a tavern which was found to have supplied minors with alcohol. The offense became one of strict or absolute liability when applied vicariously because of the need to protect weak and vulnerable members of society, and the omission of words such as "knowingly", "willfully" or "intentionally" in some of the offenses indicated a legislative intent to permit this eventuality.