What started as a boozy work-sponsored outing at a golf resort ended up a lesson in appellate procedure and the Dram Shop Act in the Pennsylvania Superior Court. The plaintiff was injured in a car accident. The crash occurred when a drunk motorist struck the plaintiff. That intoxicated motorist was coming from a golf outing sponsored by his employer, the Dairy Farmers of American. The plaintiff sued the individual motorist and the employer. The trial court granted the employer’s motion to dismiss on the pleadings, but the suit against the employee remained. Thus, the order dismissing the claims against the employer was interlocutory. So the plaintiff asked the trial court to amend that interlocutory order to contain language in 42 Pa.C.S.A. ยง 702(b), which governs appeals from interlocutory orders. The trial court granted the request and amended the order. The plaintiff then filed a timely petition for permission to appeal from that amended order. The Superior Court denied that petition, essentially relegating the matter to the Court of Common Pleas until all claims were concluded. Once all of the claims against the individual employee were settled, the plaintiff appealed from the final order, thus creating the instant appeal. Before the Superior Court, the employer claimed that the Court did not have jurisdiction because the earlier order was a final order. The Court did not appreciate the gamesmanship and held that it had jurisdiction. The Court then held that Section 4-493(a), which makes it illegal for a liquor license holder to serve alcohol to those who are clearly intoxicated, did not apply to the employer because the employer was not a licensee. And the Court held that a social host is not liable for serving alcoholic beverages to a guest. Therefore, it affirmed the Court of Common Pleas order granting judgment on the pleadings in favor of the employer.