Eaton v. Ruggles April 4, 2012 | 0 Comments | SEE FULL TEXT OPINION share share on linkedin Facebook share on twitter share on google+ Share With Email Send Thank you for sharing! Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided. print reprints Superior Court Martin, J. The Dram Shop Act does not provide a cause of action for loss of spousal consortium. VIEW COMMENTS ( 0 ) ADD COMMENT What's being said Sign In Terms & Conditions Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here. Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202557245873 Send Thank you! This article's comments will be reviewed.