Moonies Bar denies serving underage alcohol in Cornell lawsuit
Moonies Bar & Nightclub filed a formal answer in New York Supreme Court denying that it served alcohol to the plaintiff, a 20‑year‑old woman who alleges she was marked as underage during a private Tri Delta sorority event on Oct. 19, 2024, in downtown Ithaca.
The bar’s filing states it complied with all applicable state laws, marking underage guests’ hands with an "X" and providing wristbands only to patrons over 21. According to Moonies, bartenders served drinks exclusively to those wearing wristbands, and no alcohol was provided to anyone whose hand bore the under‑age mark.
The plaintiff’s lawsuit contends that despite the hand mark, she was still given at least one alcoholic beverage inside the venue. She further alleges that a bouncer placed the mark, she then consumed alcohol, and the subsequent intoxication contributed to a sexual‑assault incident involving seven former Chi Phi fraternity men.
Moonies’ court answer rejects the allegation, describing it as "completely inaccurate" and asserting that the bar neither sold nor furnished alcoholic beverages to any visibly intoxicated person. The filing also includes affirmative defenses, stating the plaintiff cannot prove the bar unlawfully sold alcohol to an under‑age or visibly intoxicated individual, nor that any such sale caused her injuries.
The establishment hosted roughly 185 guests for the event, with about 150 adults over the legal drinking age and 35 underage attendees. Moonies says it had a contract with the sorority, implemented the hand‑marking system, and maintained that it did not serve alcohol to anyone identified as underage.
Beyond the bar’s dispute, the case forms part of a larger lawsuit filed by the plaintiff against Cornell University, the fraternity, the sorority and other entities, alleging systemic failures that led to the alleged gang‑rape. The litigation has spurred widespread protests on campus, a no‑confidence resolution against university leadership, and the appointment of the New York Attorney General’s Office as a special prosecutor.
Moonies is seeking dismissal of the complaint in its entirety, arguing that no actionable injury resulted from its conduct and that it adhered fully to legal requirements. The court’s decision on the bar’s motion will be a key next step in the broader legal battle surrounding the Cornell sexual‑assault allegations.
