Should Bars Be Liable For Drunk Patrons?

[nhboy]

Link to original source.

"The staff at Dogfish Head Alehouse in Gaithersburg knew the customer’s taste in beer so well they identified him on his tab as “Mike Corona Guy” on that fatal night in August 2008.

They also knew something was wrong when Michael D. Eaton downed 17 bottles of the Mexican brew, plus a shot of vodka, in about five hours. It was too much.

Eaton’s waitress cut him off about 10 p.m., when he turned argumentative. A manager offered to call him a taxi.

Sadly, Eaton declined the cab. And no one from the alehouse insisted or tried to stop him.

Eaton drove off in what he later called a drunken blackout. Shortly afterward, while speeding, he rear-ended another car on I-270.

Jazimen Warr, age 10 at the time, was killed. She was a cheerful girl who liked dogs, horses and dancing.

Eaton, a self-described alcoholic, was duly punished. He was sentenced to eight years in prison after pleading guilty to vehicular manslaughter and leaving the scene of an accident.

But the bar escaped any responsibility last week when Maryland’s highest court rejected a closely watched lawsuit brought by the girl’s family. The Court of Appeals voted 4 to 3 to leave in place state law that bars vendors of alcohol from being held liable for injuries caused by patrons after leaving the premises.

The result was disappointing. Anti-drunken-driving activists had hoped the Gaithersburg case was so egregious that Maryland would join 43 states and the District (but not Virginia) in making bars and restaurants accountable at least in some way. "

 

[Rt235]

No. That is like saying that a grocery store should be responsible for a customers diabetes or obesity.

You drink, you accept the consequences for your actions.

 

[Gilligan]

The Court of Appeals voted 4 to 3 to leave in place state law that bars vendors of alcohol from being held liable for injuries caused by patrons after leaving the premises.
"

That.

*yawn* This gets revisited every so many years.....

 

[tommyjo]

No. That is like saying that a grocery store should be responsible for a customers diabetes or obesity.

You drink, you accept the consequences for your actions.

Extremely poor analogy on multiple points.

1st a store has no way of knowing if someone is a diabetic. It is quite obvious when someone is drunk and incapable of operating a motor vehicle.

2nd. diabetes or obesity does not make that person an immediate and imminent threat to the public.

If some fat hog goes in the store, buys a box of twinkies...eats all of them while standing in the store, there is no reasonable or rationale expectation that the patron is a danger to the public if s/he gets behind the wheel of a car.

When a bar serves a patron 17 beers and a shot in 5 hours, only a complete moron would think the patron was not a threat to the public if s/he got behind the wheel.

 

[blazinlow89]

Grocery store does work as an example, based on liberal logic it is the stores responsibility to make bad products less appealing or harder to purchase. Something like a 15 day wait to buy that said box of Twinkies.

Of course the same could be said that Auto manufacturers are responsible for drunk drivers, gun manufacturers are responsible for a massacre, and the brewery or distillery would be responsible for drunks. Of course this is liberal logic. Its never the end users fault, its the object.

 

[SamSpade]

Extremely poor analogy on multiple points.

It's a weak analogy, but it's spot on, on at least this much - a drunk may be a danger to others behind a wheel, but if he just falls down dead in an alley or gets hit by a car or freezes to death in the woods, it's because he was drunk and not because he was a danger. The same thing goes if you serve a pile of greasy wings and a double sundae to an obese person - and they have a heart attack on the way home. You may be enabling them, but ultimately it's their own decision.

In either case, you ARE responsible for your own actions. If you get lung cancer from cigarettes that you KNOW will kill you, it's not the tobacco maker's fault. If you drink so heavily you die of alcohol poisoning - as a family member came this close to doing - it's their choice.

 

[vraiblonde]

But the bar escaped any responsibility last week when Maryland’s highest court rejected a closely watched lawsuit brought by the girl’s family.

Good. At what point are people responsible for their own behavior? And now the states want to turn bartenders into babysitters?

I guess it just takes a village, huh?

 

[JeJeTe]

Good. At what point are people responsible for their own behavior? And now the states want to turn bartenders into babysitters?

I guess it just takes a village, huh?

If you are over 21 and you are drinking, you are responsible for any actions that stem from drinking. It's not the Alehouses issue if you had too much or can't handle your alcohol.

It's very sad that this happened to the little girl but this is just an example of how we are turning into a world where it's everyone elses fault but our own.

 

[NextJen]

I'm trying to think of how an establishment would be able to be responsible for people. How do you determine when someone has had too much? Blood alcohol content is determined by several factors....how many drinks over a certain period of time, how strong a drink is, how much a person weighs, etc.

Here's a few problems I can think of:
What if it's a pizza joint, bowling alley, or something similar that serves pitchers of beer? Is a waitress/waiter going to monitor who is drinking what amount of beer among the folks at the table?

What if it's shift change time and the new waitress/waiter doesn't know who drank how many drinks out of a table of five patrons over the period of two and a half hours?

Is there going to be mandatory installation of breathalyzers in all establishments that serve alcohol? Do you forcibly make people stop and blow into a breathalyzer on their way out? How are you literally going to stop a customer who is intent on leaving? Physically restrain them until police can arrive?

 

[PsyOps]

Ah yes, the progressive train continues to move towards shedding all responsibility off the individual.

 

[MarieB]

I have mixed feelings about this. I guess I would be ok with a law that stated that they could be held liable under certain circumstances, but there are so many variables I don't even know if that is possible

This case seems to be rather blatant, but what do you do if the guy refuses a taxi? Call the police?

 

[luvmygdaughters]

Who would be responsible if he was home drinking and then decided to drive? Its ridiculous. The bar cut him off, offered to call a cab. He refused. Its his fault. Adults have to be held accountable for their actions. He knew he was drunk when he got behind the wheel of the car, he made a conscious decision to drive. I feel terrible for the little girl and her family, but it was not the bars fault.

 

[pelers]

Somebody please explain to me why we feel the need to demand that everyone be responsible for our actions except ourselves. It is truly sickening.

 

[MarieB]

As it has been explained to me by a lawyer, it's part of common law

But Maryland passed a statute abrogating the common law doctrine

 

[PsyOps]

Somebody please explain to me why we feel the need to demand that everyone be responsible for our actions except ourselves. It is truly sickening.

There are things out there bigger than you and me that are controlling our lives. Bars (like all business establishments) are big powerful establishments, subliminally forcing people to drink more than they really want. We are mindless bots too stupid to stop the mental intrusion by these evil, controlling empires.

 

[SamSpade]

If you are over 21 and you are drinking, you are responsible for any actions that stem from drinking.

And you don't have to be falling down drunk to be a danger. In fact, someone THAT drunk is far more likely to be a danger to themselves, since chances are slim they'll make it 50 feet without hitting a pole or driving off the road.

Fact is, if you're over the legal limit, you're drunk and it's against the law. How in the hell is any establishment that serves alcohol supposed to know :

1. What your blood alcohol level is -
2. How long you've been drinking
3. How many drinks you've had and
4, Whether or not you drove or expected to drive?

Doesn't it make more sense to just prosecute the ever living hell out of violators rather than keep tabs on every drinker?

 

[vraiblonde]

Bars (like all business establishments) are big powerful establishments, subliminally forcing people to drink more than they really want.

THANK YOU! I've been saying that for years and everyone just rolls their eyes at me. I never want that fourth margarita, the bar forces me to drink it and it's not my fault.

 

[vraiblonde]

Is a waitress/waiter going to monitor who is drinking what amount of beer among the folks at the table?

And is it really wise to place this decision in the hands of 22 and 23 year old barmaids?

 

[Baywatchv8]

There are things out there bigger than you and me that are controlling our lives. Bars (like all business establishments) are big powerful establishments, subliminally forcing people to drink more than they really want. We are mindless bots too stupid to stop the mental intrusion by these evil, controlling empires.

We need a 7 on your side report done on this, that might explain the buzzing in my head I get walking into places like TGI Fridays or Hooters.

 

[Baywatchv8]

Law suits like this have been tried for years now. You might see these have more traction as time goes on, look at what liberties we have lost to date because someone wants to either appiese someone or they just want more power over us. I am more inclind to think the power over us is to much for politicians to pass up.