Dram Shop Injury Lawyer Houston

LAWS INVOLVING MINORS

Many dram shop laws are geared towards situations where the person who is served the alcohol is under the age of 21. In particular, when the seller knew or should have known, that the person being served or sold the alcohol is under the age of 21, laws in those states hold the establishment liable for the resulting injuries caused by the underage, intoxicated party.

SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY LAWS

In some states, “dram shop laws” and “social host liability laws” are used interchangeably. Generally speaking in those states, social host liability laws hold sellers responsible for injuries caused by intoxicated persons to whom they sold or provided alcohol when it was clear these intoxicated persons were indeed intoxicated and should not consume more alcohol.

In other states, social hosts are generally people that throw a party and serve alcohol, and they are treated differently from vendors who sell alcohol. In most of these states, a social host can be held liable for serving alcohol to a minor but not for serving alcohol to an intoxicated adult.

HABITUAL DRINKER LAWS

In some states that have dram shop laws, one of the ways an establishment can be held liable is when they serve a person known to them as someone that abuses alcohol. These laws are not to be confused with laws like Virginia’s where people designated as habitual drunkards could be arrested for purchasing alcohol – this Virginia law was struck down and amended.

FIRST-PARTY DRAM SHOP LAWS

First-party dram shop laws apply to cases where the plaintiff is the person that was served the alcohol. Typically, although it depends on the state, these are people under the age of 21, and after leaving the establishment that served them the alcohol, they suffer an injury due to their over-consumption. For example, if a 20-year-old was served alcohol to the point of intoxication at a bar, and then attempted to drive home but on the way lost control of their vehicle and hit a tree causing severe injuries, they may pursue a claim against the bar that served them.

First-party dram shop liability tends to be difficult to prove. A jury tends not to side with the party they hold accountable directly for the accident – in this case, the intoxicated minor. A jury tends to find against these claims because they believe the “victim” should be held responsible for their own actions.

THIRD-PARTY DRAM SHOP LAWS

When a party that has been injured by an intoxicated person sues the establishment that served the intoxicated person the alcohol, third-party dram shop laws apply. For example, if we use the same example from above, but instead of hitting a tree the intoxicated 20-year-old driver hit another vehicle head-on, seriously injuring the occupants, then the third-party occupants may sue the bar. To be clear, under these laws, the 20-year-old intoxicated driver cannot sue the bar for damages if they were also injured.

Third-party dram shop liability tends to be less difficult to prove, but the claimant will have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the establishment is at fault. In most jurisdictions with these types of laws, the claimant usually must show that the intoxicated driver was visibly intoxicated when over-served alcohol by the establishment or, if the intoxicated person was a minor, show that the establishment had reason to know the person served alcohol was under the age of 21 years.

VISIBLE INTOXICATION

While proving that an underage person was served alcohol is not a difficult task, in cases where the person is over the age of 21, proving that they were “visibly intoxicated” can be burdensome. Often, a toxicologist will be retained by the plaintiff to prove that the drunk party was clearly, and visibly intoxicated.

PLACES WHERE ALCOHOL WAS CONSUMED

Another issue for a person seeking restitution under the dram shop laws is proving that the vendor was the only entity or person that served the person in question alcohol. In other words, was the vendor the only establishment where the intoxicated person consumed alcohol, or was it just one of many?

CAUSE OF ACCIDENT

Proving that a person involved in an accident was incorrectly served, or over-served, alcohol is not enough to recover compensation from the vendor. In addition, it still needs to be established that the intoxicated person actually caused the accident.

EVIDENCE IN DRAM SHOP LIABILITY CASES IN TEXAS

Recovering restitution under dram shop laws is often multi-faceted. Further, as the above issues indicate, proving liability can be challenging. You have a burden to prove your case by a preponderance of the evidence. That evidence can include:

Expert testimony, like toxicologists
Witness testimony, like statements of any witnesses present when the intoxicated person was at the bar, bought the alcohol, etc.
Receipts or credit card statements, that indicate the amount of alcohol that was served and at what times it was served
Photographs or videos that can be recovered showing how much alcohol the person was served, as well as the condition they were in when they arrived at the establishment and when they left the establishment
According to the facts of the case and the jurisdiction, additional evidence may be needed.