Dram Shop Law

Abstract

The purpose of this text is to gain a true understanding for Dram Shop Law liabilities in a general aspect, but also more in depth when it comes to the specifications regarding the State of Florida. The history and breakdown of Dram Shop Law will be thoroughly explained along with specific examples of cases that have occurred within the State of Florida.

Background and explanation of Dram Shop Law in a general aspect

Dram Shop Law otherwise known as Dram Shop Liability Statute is currently applied in 43 states across America. The eight remaining states who do not follow these laws are the following- Delaware, Louisiana, Maryland, Nebraska, South Dakota, Virginia, Nevada, and Kansas. The name Dram Shop Law was created in England during the 18th century when alcohol such as gin was sold in units measured in “drams” in bars and taverns. Dram Shop Liability is a civil liability that can be put on a person or establishment that sells or serves liquor if injury occurs. Each state as an individual implements their own Dram Shop Laws based on how liable they want to hold the person of action accountable for. The same scenario applies if a business or persons willingly provides an intoxicated person, a person with a drinking problem, or a minor alcohol where the provider is held liable if an injury occurs.

As mentioned, each state varies on their own version of Dram Shop Laws. Some states have a strict time limit that a claim can be made within, such as Florida allowing only four years from the incident, or in other states only 60 days. Social Host liability also ranges where the host of a private party or event would be held liable for serving a minor or someone who ends up in an accident due to their intoxication (Drews, 2019).

Dram Shop Law in reference to the state of Florida

Dram Shop Law varies widely with each state across the United States having their own specifications. In 1962, the Florida Supreme Court acted as the third jurisdiction to take the original common law which would allow some negligence claims to be made against vendors of alcohol that the sale could be the cause of an injury (Drews, 2019). Within two years after the twenty-first amendment was made, The Florida Legislature repealing prohibition was ratified, which is now section 562.11, making it an illegal crime to sell alcohol to a minor. (Migliore v. Crown Liquors of Broward, Inc., 448 So. 2d 978, 1984 Fla. LEXIS 2728). The state of Florida Dram ShopLaw falls under Statutes Section 768.125 which enables a person who was injured in a car accident that was caused by an impaired driver to sue a bar or any other establishment that directly sold them or provided them with alcohol (Weber & Prado, 2019). Florida Statutes section 768.125 Liability for injury or damage resulting from intoxication directly states,

“A person who sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person or lawful drinking age shall not thereby become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the  intoxication of such person, except that a person willingly and unlawfully sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person who is not of lawful drinking age or who knowingly serves a person habitually addicted to the use of any or all alcoholic beverages may become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such minor or person.” (The Florida Statues, 2020).

Therefore, in layman’s (“lay”) terms it is only allowed that a person can sue a bar or establishment if alcohol was served to a habitually addicted adult or a minor under the legal drinking age of 21 years old. Hosts of social gatherings cannot be held responsible for damages caused by alcohol that was served within a private party or event, even if the guests are habitually addicted individuals, but, the host can be held liable for serving alcohol to a minor.

Although, they may still face charges or penalties such as getting their license revoked for a specified period of time. In order to make a Dram Shop claim in Florida the injured person must make the claim within the required four years from the date of the incident, if and when the statute of limitations runs out during this time period, the victim of the incident will be barred from suing the bar. In most scenarios when it comes to Dram Shop cases the claim against the bar or establishment falls under negligence, therefore, it must be proven. There are four required elements that the victim must be able to prove:

1. Duty of care
2. Breach of Duty
3. Causation
4. Damages as a result of injury with the addition of evidence of all.

Complications often arise when it comes to Dram Shop cases, especially when it comes to providing evidence. It can often be a challenge to prove that the person or persons at fault are a habitual drunk, to go even further; to prove that those who served the alcohol to this person was aware that they were a habitual drunk is even more of a task. There are a handful of reasons why one might seek compensation while filing a Dram Shop claim, such as, for medical bill coverage for any or all of their injuries including their hospitalization fees, medication and rehabilitation charges. As well as, any wages they might have lost due to not being able to work, replacement costs for damaged or destroyed property, and pain or suffering they might have faced during their recovery (The 2020 Florida Statutes 2020

History of Dram Shop Law and case examples

Despite the Laws in place in Florida when it comes to Dram Shop, there have been countless cases and suits about the matter. In Migliore v. Crown Liquors of Broward, Inc. 448 So. 2d 978 liquor was sold to a minor which is someone who is stated to be under the age of 21 in this region. It is also said that serving or selling alcoholic beverages to a minor is an obvious foreseeable risk of the minor’s intoxication and injury to themself or a third person also seen as negligence, therefore, they were to be considered in the class of persons to be protected by the legislation. In this case, the court ultimately determined that the respondent liquor store was indeed liable for the petitioner that was injured as a third party, due to the fact that they were injured or killed by an intoxicated minor who was illegally sold alcohol.

On December 2, 1978, Frank Milgliore, was riding passenger side seat in an automobile that was struck by another automobile that was being operated by Bruce Gahring, a seventeen year old boy. Milgliore filed the suit stating that Crown Liquors of Broward County sold alcohol to the minor Bruce Gahring failing to ask for identification during the purchase of large amounts of alcohol. Therefore, this was further a concurring and contributing factor playing a critical role in the leading up to the accident and the injuries that Milgliore later faced that evening on the highway. Crown Liquors fired back stating that with a summary judgement on the grounds that Milgliore had no cause of action against them for their sale of alcohol to gahring , claiming that the record contained no evidence showing that the sale constituted a proximate cause of the accident that evening. This led the trial court to grant this motion and entered summary judgement in favor of Crown Liquors.

Milgliore appealed to the Fourth District who stated that the summary judgement and agreed with Crown Liquors that Section 562.11 in fact does not extend liability to the injured third parties. In reference to a previous case that occurred Prevatt v. McClennan, 201 So.2d 780 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967) contrary to the Fourth District’s holdings, section 768.125 creates a cause of action for the third persons against dispensers of those intoxicated whom are minors, therefore, it is a limitation on the liability of vendors of alcoholic beverages. Section 768.125, Florida Statutes 1981 stating:

“A person who sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person of lawful drinking age shall not thereby become liable for [*981] injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such person, except that a person who willfully and unlawfully sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person who is not of lawful drinking age or who knowingly serves a person habitually addicted to the use of any or all alcoholic beverages may become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such minor or person.” Migliore v. Crown Liquors of Broward, Inc., 448 So. 2d 978, 1984 Fla. LEXIS 2728

Based on this statute and the references to the Prevatt v. McClennan case, the Fourth District must adopt the Second District’s holdings and remand further proceedings that are consistent with this decision. In an unassociated case that contained different circumstances, Mary Evelyn Ellis, a mother, filed a suit claiming that her son, Gilbert Ellis, was an alleged habitual drunkard who consumed multiple drinks at a local bar in Tampa, Florida. After leaving the property following the consumption of a few drinks, he was involved in an automobile accident where he overturned and crashed his car leading to extensive injuries including permanent brain damage. The trial court granted the respondents’ motion but did not provide a specific cause of action since these circumstances were alleged and not proven at the time. A claim of ordinary negligence under chapter 768.125 did not require the establishment of the elements of a criminal offense under chapter 562.50.

The outcome of this case was finalized with the court’s decision to quash the lower appellate court’s decision and remanded for further proceedings. The case concluded that a person who knowingly served a person habitual drunkard alcohol may become liable for injury caused by or resulting from their intoxication. The legislature on the case used the word “knowingly”, in the statute, a claim of ordinary negligence did not require the business of the elements of a criminal offense under chapter 562.50 since the establishment had no prior written notice of Gilbert’s alleged addiction. This ties into previously mentioned difficulties that are often run into in court when it comes to Dram Shop Lawsuits, until it is proven in court that negligence did knowingly occur, suits will often be dismissed. Otherwise, there is no proof that the persons who served the alcohol were aware of the alleged addiction that the guest had.

Management Suggestions

As a future manager in the Hospitality Industry, it is of the utmost importance that Dram Shop Law be well known especially in the state of Florida. Any establishment that owns or operates a business that involves the sale or providing of alcohol should be extremely careful to be as preventative as possible when it comes to the sales to their guests and the consumption of them. From a management point of view, from the now knowledge that has been obtained while writing and doing research for this paper, it has become very evident that little mistakes or small instances of negligence can have very serious consequences. Training staff and managers is to be taken seriously from the onboarding processes of new staff. If staff was to be unaware of the certain laws that the state places when it comes to Dram Shop they will not only unknowingly break laws, but they will be unable to prevent any accidents or situations that can ultimately lead to harm of third parties, the business, and the person of intoxication.

Having standards set in stone in every business when it comes to protocols is very important. For example, those serving alcohol should be aware of how to identify a fake Identification card that a minor might walk in with and try to consume or purchase alcohol with. Regulations when it comes to how many drinks per hour a guest should consume should also be made aware in order to avoid accidents. In addition, note should be taken if someone becomes a known habitual drunk at the establishment, whether it be at a bar, a restaurant, or a liquor store of any sort.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Dram Shop Law is a very diverse law that varies state by state depending on their specifications. In the Hospitality Industry, there is a lot of sales and consumption of alcohol, therefore, in every state each establishment should make their employees aware of what to look out for and how to prevent running into any issues with Dram Shop Law or negligence. Major takeaways from this research are the associated Dram Shop Laws that directly correlate with the state of Florida, since that is the current state of residence. Including, the four required elements that the victim must be able to prove: 1. Duty of care 2. Breach of Duty 3. Causation 4. Damages as a result of injury with the addition of evidence of all. Along with the four year time limit that a claim must be filed within from the date of the incident.

References

Drews January 7, M. D. (2019, January 03). Liability or Lack Thereof Under Florida’s Dram Shop Statute. Retrieved December 02, 2020, from https://www.tysonmendes.com/liability-lack-thereof-floridas-dram-shop-statute/Ellis v. N.G.N. of Tampa, 586 So. 2d 1042, 1991 Fla. LEXIS 1625, 16 Fla. L. Weekly S 619

Florida Dram Shop Law. (2017, March 14). Retrieved December 04, 2020, from https://www.lorenzoandlorenzo.com/personal-injury-guide/florida-dram-shop-law/

Migliore v. Crown Liquors of Broward, Inc., 448 So. 2d 978, 1984 Fla. LEXIS 2728

The 2020 Florida Statutes. (2020, December 04). Retrieved December 01, 2020, from http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute

Weber, P., & Prado, D. (2019, June 18). Dram Shop Laws. Retrieved December 01, 2020, from https://www.findlaw.com/dui/laws-resources/dram-shop-laws.html https://www.pwdlawfirm.com/personal-injury/does-florida-have-a-dram-shop-law-to-sue-a-bar-for-a-drunk-driving-crash/