Bars and Restaurants liability in DWI's?

[KSB2424 3,083]

There is a local tragic story about a 20 year old college kid with a fake ID who was bar hopping, got hammered, and was driving the wrong way on I85 and hit another car head on killing two adults and a 9 year old girl.

 

It's a tragedy all around. Obviously these people are now dead due to this and the kid was by all accounts a great kid, going to UNC-Chapel Hill and made a horrific mistake that night.

 

Well he's in jail (obviously) and is facing 2nd degree murder charges. But that's not my question. There is also a civil suit out there and yesterday a bar and a restaurant that this kid went to before the accident are now named in the civil suit. It's come up before but I don't know how I feel about this.

 

The guy had a fake ID and it's been said it was really good. I'm having a hard time reconciling how much liability an establishment has for its patrons. This was on my mind earlier this summer when I set up and managed a charity golf tournament. We had beer at the course and I had a fleeting thought that, damn, what if some golfer drank to much and got in an accident leaving the golf course. Could they actually sue me personally even though I'm just trying to run a charity thing here and help somebody? Am I exposing myself to risk here?

 

Anyway....not sure how much I like the bar / restaurant being included in this civil suit. Any opinions?

[Baker Boy 1,485]

The fake ID should not be an issue as long as they checked him and the fake ID was good. but over serving is another issue. Bars, hosts etc. should be held responsible for "over serving" their customers or guests and allowing them to drive. The problem is defining "over serving". It is a very slippery slope.

[Djgb13 2,338]

My opinion is we no longer hold the individual responsible. It's always someone else's fault. The kid had a fake ID that was pretty legit. There was no fault on the bars or restaurant in my opinion

[MDC 5,897]

I am not a pretend lawyer, but according to my sense of fairness the bar's liability should depend on 1) whether they were negligent in failing to identify the ID as a fake and 2) whether they were serving the driver while he was visibly intoxicated.

 

[edjr 5,573]

I don't even want to get into this focking bullchit

[IGotWorms 3,319]

The law depends on the state. Many states used to have what was called a dram shop act that imposed pretty broad liability on bars etc. But most states have since repealed that. However there is typically some common law component that comes into play where a patron is so intoxicated that he is essentially helpless (think Wiffleball), and so if you continue to serve him it's on you.

 

Personally I don't see why they should be exempt from liability for DUIs and the like. You are contributing to the persons negligence and in all other citcumstances we would say that makes you liable too.

[edjr 5,573]

The bartender can also be at fault as per the dram shop act

[shotsup 832]

I don't even want to get into this focking bullchit

I'm with you here.

[wiffleball 4,648]

I've had this talk with a lot of bar folks ever since Colorado legalized pot.

 

What happens a LOT around here is people might only have a couple of cocktails, but in between drinks, they go out and "vape'' weed. And the legal shiit will seriously blow the back of your skull out.

 

So, back in the day, a BT could sort of manage things simply by counting the number of drinks served in a period of time. But now, I've seen men and women just get COMPLETELY focked up after only 2 cocktails.

 

It's a serious concern for responsible bar owners and employees. It's only a matter of time before this works its way through the courts.

[Djgb13 2,338]

The guy could also appear in the bars to not be intoxicated so naturally the bartender thinks he's ok. Working in a bar or restaurant as a bartender you get really busy and don't always have the time to monitor how many drinks someone has had or do more than five them a quick glance over to see if they are visible drunk. Remember alcohol takes time to absorb into your body so the guy could have very easily not shown signs of being intoxicated until he was ready to go home

[Magnificent Bastard 190]

How about people go out and get focked up and don't drive?

[Djgb13 2,338]

How about people go out and get focked up and don't drive?

No see that's responsible and not cool. We can't do that. Today we are supposed to be able to get away with anything as long as we blame someone else.

[Magnificent Bastard 190]

The law depends on the state. Many states used to have what was called a dram shop act that imposed pretty broad liability on bars etc. But most states have since repealed that. However there is typically some common law component that comes into play where a patron is so intoxicated that he is essentially helpless (think Wiffleball), and so if you continue to serve him it's on you.

 

Personally I don't see why they should be exempt from liability for DUIs and the like. You are contributing to the persons negligence and in all other citcumstances we would say that makes you liable too.

Right. Let's say Wiffleball comes stumbling in the bar and starts screaming in to his phone to post on a low rent message board. Should be really get served? So I guess it depends on the situation. Some people hide their intoxication better than others.

[shotsup 832]

Local bar called "Dogwood Inn" nicknamed DWI - not a good nickname for a bar !!!!

[wiffleball 4,648]

Right. Let's say Wiffleball comes stumbling in the bar and starts screaming in to his phone to post on a low rent message board. Should be really get served? So I guess it depends on the situation. Some people hide their intoxication better than others.

Wow, I am really in your head. F****** creepy

[Magnificent Bastard 190]

Wow, I am really in your head. F****** creepy

Lighten up. Have some fun with it.

[DankNuggs 305]

In MA the bar is potentially liable for over serving. There was a case 20 years ago or so that set the precedent. Just don't have a bar with a parking lot

 

And you should have carried some kind of insurance or get additionally insured by the golf course or catering company if you personally were running the event. There is definitely some liability exposure

[jerryskids 5,212]

The law depends on the state. Many states used to have what was called a dram shop act that imposed pretty broad liability on bars etc. But most states have since repealed that. However there is typically some common law component that comes into play where a patron is so intoxicated that he is essentially helpless (think Wiffleball), and so if you continue to serve him it's on you.

 

Personally I don't see why they should be exempt from liability for DUIs and the like. You are contributing to the persons negligence and in all other citcumstances we would say that makes you liable too.

 

I'm fundamentally against bars being responsible. In Arizona you can be considered DWI at .04-.08 (above is guaranteed). A 100 lb woman who drinks 1 margarita over an hour is likely above .04 according to this website:

 

http://bloodalcoholcalculator.org/#LinkURL

 

So if that woman has one drink in a reasonable time, gets in her car and gets into an accident, the bar is liable? It's kinda slippery slope I know, but IMO it is another thing in the direction our society is headed where nobody takes personal responsibility.

 

That being said, I can see if a guy is wiffle-esque drunk, there may be liability if the bar continues to serve him with a reasonable expectation of knowing he was driving. I think wiffle's locals know that he usually walks, so IMO it would not be reasonable to think he was going to drive, if he chose to do so for some reason one evening.

[IGotWorms 3,319]

 

I'm fundamentally against bars being responsible. In Arizona you can be considered DWI at .04-.08 (above is guaranteed). A 100 lb woman who drinks 1 margarita over an hour is likely above .04 according to this website:

 

http://bloodalcoholcalculator.org/#LinkURL

 

So if that woman has one drink in a reasonable time, gets in her car and gets into an accident, the bar is liable? It's kinda slippery slope I know, but IMO it is another thing in the direction our society is headed where nobody takes personal responsibility.

 

That being said, I can see if a guy is wiffle-esque drunk, there may be liability if the bar continues to serve him with a reasonable expectation of knowing he was driving. I think wiffle's locals know that he usually walks, so IMO it would not be reasonable to think he was going to drive, if he chose to do so for some reason one evening.

 

FYI, Wiffle doesn't appreciate being referenced as the "obviously sh!tfaced" guy. He even PM'd me to let me know

 

 

 

 

(In his defense, he was probably drunk.)

[wiffleball 4,648]

 

FYI, Wiffle doesn't appreciate being referenced as the "obviously sh!tfaced" guy. He even PM'd me to let me know

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(In his defense, he was probably drunk.)

He was actually sober. Bunny, titans and sux are actually the most admittedly and otherwise drunken lushes here. But, keep with your narratives, it makes for an interesting story.

[IGotWorms 3,319]

He was actually sober. Bunny, titans and sux are actually the most admittedly and otherwise drunken lushes here. But, keep with your narratives, it makes for an interesting story.

 

Actually I'd say Bunny and shotsup

[wiffleball 4,648]

 

Actually I'd say Bunny and shotsup

Good call. My biggest weakness Is a retarded smartphone and being too lazy, blind, To go back and edit Every f***** up post.

[Magnificent Bastard 190]

 

FYI, Wiffle doesn't appreciate being referenced as the "obviously sh!tfaced" guy. He even PM'd me to let me know

 

 

 

 

(In his defense, he was probably drunk.)

[shotsup 832]

 

Actually I'd say Bunny and shotsup