Should bartenders be liable for its drunk customers?
 

Bartender jailed for lethal tequila

Wednesday, November 23, 2005; Posted: 9:46 a.m. EST (14:46 GMT)

OSLO, Norway (AP) -- A 32-year-old Norwegian bartender was sentenced to six months in prison Wednesday for serving a customer so much tequila that he fell into a coma and died.

According to a district court in the southwestern city of Hokksund the bartender, whose name was withheld, pleaded guilty to serving 34-year-old Leif Henning Nilsen 19 shots of the strong Mexican liquor in 90 minutes at the Spiseriet restaurant in May 2004.

Nilsen lost consciousness and died three days later.

The court said it could not hold the bartender accountable for the death itself, but sentenced him to prison for illegally serving alcohol to a clearly intoxicated person.

The ruling said the bartender intentionally contributed to the excess by drinking shots of water, tricking the victim into what he thought was a drinking contest.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe....ap/index.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think most of us (either in college or at some other point) have been to bars celebrating with lots of alcohol and have ended up drunk. Let's say in that drunken state, something bad happens (ex. car accident, fight, death, etc.).

Should bartenders be liable for the actions of its customers?

In Massachusetts, there has been a lot of talk on DUI legislation after a recent piece called "Melanie's Bill" was passed. It imposed tougher restrictions on drunk drivers, but there was other discussion on what to do about bartenders and establishments that serve to visibly drunk patrons. Some lawmakers (and members of the legal community) feel that it's a necessary next step, holding establishments liable for alcohol-related problems.

Personally, I think it would be difficult to prove guilt in a lot of cases; how do you pinpoint the drink that put someone over the limit? If someone was at several places, where were they when they had the fateful drink?

Is there legislation like this in any places? I think this could come up as a major topic here in Massachusetts very soon.

People, drunk are not, are responsible for themselves. I don't care how drunk someone is, if they drink themselves into a coma and die, it is their fault (unless someone is forcing them to drink). If you can't handle your booze, don't drink or get help. You cannot 100% protect a person from themselves.

There are numerous cases where bars have been found liable for accidents caused by patrons after they left the bar.

That's why there is such a push among many Greek organizations for third party vendors and the like. In the end, even a third party vendor may not totally protect an organization from lawsuits, but it probably does spread the liability around.

Unfortunately, whether fair or not -- and who should have ultimate responsibility -- that's the way juries and courts have seen it.

If you're a bartender, and you don't know that giving someone 19 shots is going to eff them up pretty bad, then you probably are too dumb to be a bartender. Given that bartenders generally have an idea when a patron is drunk, and reasonably should know to stop serving somewhere before that 19th shot, I'd say that the bartender should be held liable. In fact, in the U.S., unless a statute protected them, I'd almost be willing to guarantee there's a liability there.

In Norway though, I have no clue.

In WA state, they are really strict on this. Anyone who serves liquor (ie bartender, waiter, etc) must be licenced to serve it. Yes you have to have a liquor card, take test and know the laws about serving alcohol and knowing when to cut the folx off. If you work in a grocery store, you cannot sell beer or wine to someone who is already under the influence. You can be fined, jailed and lose your job

Who do you sue when someone dies as a result of drinking at home? The keg?

In seriousness though, serving someone 19 shots in 90 minutes is stupid.

I can remember back to my college days of going out to a club that had 25 cents Tequila shots. :eek: There was usually 5 of us, each ordering about $5 worth. If we were all buying these for one person, the bartender wouldn't know.

Is this case really any different than the man that sued McDonalds for making him obese? I laughed at the thought of it, but in all seriousness is this really that different?

I think that yes they should. If someone keeps on coming up to you all night buying drinks, you have a pretty good idea of when they get drunk and should stop serving them. Bars are private businesses and do have the right to refuse to serve someone. One of my housemates is a bartender, and what she usually does is that when really drunk girls come up to her and order drinks, she just won't put any more alcohol in them.

It's not always possible for a bartender to keep an eye on every single person they are serving.

In a busy bar on a Saturday night, the bartenders will often be so busy that they don't pay too much attention to the person they are serving (in a place that is 21 and up).... And they see so many faces in such a short amount of time, it could easily be hard for them to recognize one and remember how many times that person has been to the bar.

AND, it also doesn't take into account bar hopping.... Someone may have gone to 6 different bars in an hour or 2, and taken 18 shots.... Then they go to bar #7 and someone orders them one drink that puts them way over the top. How can that possibly be the bartender's fault?

I think this is a time when people need to be able to take care of themselves and/or trust their friends to do so.... Don't look for someone else to blame.

I think the bartender probably should not have served the person so much.... But I don't think he is responsible for the person's death.

This also forces iffy judgement calls on the part of the bartender - essentially you are determining liability based upon a 'skill' (reading the approximate level of danger to the person being served, using only brief inspection from across the bar) in what is essentially an unskilled profession.

It's a rough precedent to set, because while it's obvious that the bartender in this case went way too far (and was somewhat aware it was f-ed up, w/ the water shots and all), most cases will not be that cut and dry. Keep in mind that peoples' reactions to alcohol vary wildly, which is why roadside sobriety tests (which are routinely challenged) are oftentimes being replaced by BAC breath tests, etc. To ask a bartender to make this sort of judgement call, under potential penalty of law, seems a bit . . . much.

Also, think about this: while you consider your friend's actions to be liability-reducing, if they're ordering, say, Rum and Coke and she's just giving them Coke, the soda may have a dehydrating effect and contribute (in some small part) to injury. Is she liable for that? Did she know that? Of course not, because she's a bartender - not any sort of expert on body language, nursing/health care, or anything else. She can make shots. That's it. Bartender.

I agree with you here.

Hell no they shouldn't be liable.

The person drinking is the one making the choice to do so. If they are so drunk that they don't know what they are doing...then why are they buying more drinks?

Sometimes my friends and I go out to the bar for the sole purpose of getting hammered. It's not uncommon to take 20+ shots, and I'd be pissed off if the bartender stopped serving me. It's my money it's my choice in how I want to spend it.

But in many cases they have been ruled liable. That's the way it is. Should or shouldn't doesn't count.

Even companies have been held liable if an employee has an accident going home from a company party.

It seems to be a new legal principle -- throw as much...uh...mud at the wall as you can and see how much sticks.

There have been many accounts where a Club or Bar Tender is found Libel fo over serving someone who leaves DUI/DWI and kills someone on the way Home or themselves. So where does the Money Come into play? Oh, Lets Sue them at the Bar and The Bar Tender who may have given the Drinks to someone else and they then took them to the person. Any Bar Tender I knew would cut them off. Where were their Friends who Kept supplying them with Alcohol? :eek:

The Moralistic More's have change so much to day! I am Going To Sue Someone!:mad:

Well, because of the Our Federal Govt. have so decided what all of the Morals are for us, We cannot do Shit. If We violate said Laws, the Legals will be there to take care of everything.

Sickening at the Most!:rolleyes:

Cites, please, so we can address these beyond the generalities you're dealing in.

Currently, my knowledge is that in the overwhelming amount of these situations (and note that greek life falls outside of these, usually), individuals serving alcohol in bars have only been found liable when they performed some sort of outlandish action (lighting the bar on fire, lying about content/quantity, participating in 'games' such as the shots of water) beyond simply serving someone who later died.

Some states have "Dram Shop Laws" making the bar/bartender liable if they over serve a customer. In response, the bars buy "Dram Shop Insurance" which protects them from liability. The cost of the insurance is passed along to the customers in higher drink and food prices. IL is an example of this.

We had an interesting case here in GA this fall. A 7-11 type store refused to sell booze to an obviously drunk guy. He was too drunk to even pump his own gas, so an employee pumped it. The drunk did something bad on the highway, and the store and employee lost in court for pumping gas before the guy hit the road. Suspect this will be appealed, if the store has deep pockets.

I think they can be liable in certain instances to a certain extent. If you stumble up to the bar, obviously wasted, they shouldn't serve you. If you were drinking all night and people were buying drinks for you, though, they have absolutely no way of knowing.

On a tangent, the title of this thread is irking the isht out of me.... bartenders=THEIR, not its

/grammar rant

Sorry. Never been a law student and wouldn't know how to look them up. I'm only speaking from memory regarding Risk Management seminars and experience as a manager about company parties, etc.

Maybe someone else can help.

Where's kddani when you need her?

I know that the law differs from state to state (viva la states' rights!), but here, should I have a party and someone gets drunk, and kills someone while driving drunk, it is my fault.

My problem with these laws is the same as Lindz's: what if someone goes bar hopping, and someone else goes to the bar to buy the drinks (possibly from different bartenders)? Should the bar then held responsible?

I've got mixed feelings about this. You all have made some good points--how do you know if a person has been bar-hopping and this is the 19th bar they've been to that night? Or that the person buying a drink isn't buying it for their hammered friend? You don't. Now, I can understand if someone stumbles up to the bar and is obviously in bad shape that the bartender should know that that person does not need anything more to drink, and that's usually what happens at the bars I go to. A couple nights ago, for example, I went to pick my boyfriend up where he was having drinks with some friends, and one dude was so totally hammered that he could barely even stand up, much less walk straight. It was at that point that the bartender came over and said that they would need to leave, and that the bouncer would be watching to see that Mr. Intoxicated had a safe ride home. That was cool, because the guy was obviously drunk out of his mind. But then there are the people who don't look that drunk at first glance...

FWIW, I understand that the laws in Europe for drunk driving are MUCH stricter than here. Do you think that, since this happened in Norway, there's a connection?

That would be really hard to prove at some large bars.

The place I usually go to for dancing has FOUR different rooms, and 2 bars in 2 of the rooms, plus a deck. Plus there are like 3 bartenders at each bar. How on earth could they keep track of how much people have drank? Have little walkie talkies and say "drunk girl in pink tube top moving towards deck, do not serve"?

The only type places I can see where you could legitimately prove this is teeny weeny holes in the wall, with one guy tending bar, that probably wouldn't be able to pay you off if you did sue them and win.

I don't think they should be held responsible. On the other hand, if a person is that wasted why in the hell are they still serving them??

this is exactly why I hated being a bartender. In Texas you have to have a TABC certification to server liqour/beer, and if someone leaves your establishment and causes an accident YOU and your establishment are held resposible because of Third-party liability/Dram Shop law. You can go to jail as well as be sued and deal with a hefty fine.

I had been a bartender for years at restaurants, but after a year of working in a bar(drinks only-no food) and having to worry about the drunk people trying to leave, the cops in the parking lot, and whether I had overserved anyone, I had enough.

In order to get the Liquor Commission "Blue Card" that'll allow someone to bartend, one had to attend an all day class and then come back the next day and take the test.

Your reasons are the exact same reasons why I left that industry for good.

I myself am torn on the subject. While I don't really feel bartenders should be held liable, they should still exercise good judgement and be held responsible to some extent...especially if you're going to serve 19 shots of tequila in 90 minutes.

Luckily all the bartenders I know of in the industry here are reputable and fear the wrath of the Hawaii Liquor Commission to do such a thing.

Here's a 1L answer (meaning I'm quite probably wrong):

Generally speaking (and this varies from state to state), a bar patron is considered an "invitee". An invitee is someone who is upon the premises to conduct business which concerns the occupier (the bar owner/bartender). The business owes them an affirmative duty to protect them, not only against dangers of which he knows, but also against those which with reasonable care he might discover (that's a common law principle quoted directly from the Bible of Torts, Prosser & Keeton).

In the case above, we have at least the owner of the bar whose duty is to protect the invitee (patron) from dangers of which he knows (alcohol poisoning). This duty is in many cases extended by statute to the bartender, I know this for a fact in my state.

After duty, we have a breach of that duty (getting the customer dangerously intoxicated by the bartender's act of overserving), the causation in fact and proximate cause of the injury are easy to establish since death is a foreseeable consequence of having 19 shots of tequila, so in the end, you have a really good case for negligence.

-- and in many states, if there's a statute that requires bartenders to not overserve customers, there is a good case for negligence per se which imposes liability simply based on the violation of the statute.

(now, real GC lawyers, tell me how bad that answer was, I'm getting ready for my first round of exams)

Well I have never done the law thingy either... I have done the servers and managers certification course way up here - and yes the establishment can be liable.

Copy of the ministry brief given to managers/owners:
http://www.agco.on.ca/pdf/Non-Forms/3052E.pdf#search='bar%20liability%20drunk'