Florida Law Limits Servers' Culpability in DUI Accidents

Under Florida state law, a person who sells or provides alcohol to someone of lawful drinking age is not liable for any damage which may occur as a result of the drinker's intoxication. This current statute has been the source of much heated debate across the state of Florida recently, with bartenders voicing their staunch support of law and activist groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving voicing their opinion that the law is overly broad and irresponsible in practice.

The question of a bartender's culpability arose after Army Lieutenant Tyler L. Peterson and a friend spent the evening bar-hopping late November of this year. The evening culminated in a deadly head-on collision on the Pensacola Bay Bridge which occurred as a result of Peterson driving the wrong direction on the bridge. The accident claimed his life, as well as the life of Antonio Fulfer, who was returning home from work late that evening.

Gulf Breeze Assistant Police Chief Robert Randall stated that Peterson and his friend, Army Captain Jesse Erickson, spent the evening at several different bars, including the Pensacola Ale House, New York Nick's, Starbuck's Billiard Room, and Intermission. Erickson told police that he asked the Intermission bartender to stop serving Peterson because he had imbibed several alcohol beverages in quick succession. At approximately 10:30 p.m., Peterson excused himself from the bar and headed towards the bathroom. The accident occurred at about 12:30 a.m. that morning. Peterson's whereabouts for the two hour period preceding the accident are unknown.

Curt Bol was working as a bartender at Intermission the evening of the fatal accident. He stated, "I've been doing this a long time, and I know that I have no way to control where my customers have been or whatever substances they have in their body. I can't demand their keys. I can't take anything from them, but somehow I am responsible? I'm not the baby-sitter here."

Bartender Shana Gilman voiced her support of the limit of culpability for bartenders, stating, "People serving alcohol should be responsible about who they serve and who they choose not to serve. But there's only so much I can control. In the end, someone can sneak out and drink in their car or they can go to another bar. Then how much responsibility can you put on me?"

The owner of Intermission, Mike Ashby, stated that he is confident that none of his staff served Peterson any alcoholic beverages. However, the more important factor which must be determined, he stated, is whether Peterson was even in Intermission during that two hour window between the time he was cut off by his friend and when the fatal accident occurred. The limited liability law is designed to protect bartenders and bar owners from liability in situations where individuals drink alcoholic beverages at a number of locations or sneak alcoholic beverages without the bartenders knowledge. In these cases, the legislature argues, bartenders should not be held accountable for these individual's irresponsible actions.

In support of this debate, many local bar and restaurant owners have said that they require their employees to participate in special training in order to handle individuals who have overindulged. According to Tom Carmichael, general manager of Capt'n Fun at Pensacola Beach, "There are common sense things that you look for. In this business you can tell when somebody has had too much, when walking and talking changes. If the bartender makes the call to cut somebody off, nobody will override that decision."

However, according to Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), the state law limiting liability should be changed. Florida's MADD chapter has voiced their intention to push for a change to the liability law in the next legislative session. "If you look at the current legislation, there is little motivation for a server to be cognizant of the patrons they are serving," stated Todd Rosenbaum, director of Mothers Against Drunk Driving of Northwest Florida. Currently, the only way a bartender can be held liable is by serving a customer with a known alcohol addiction or by serving an individual under the age of twenty one. MADD believes that this law should be changed to include liability for bartenders who are found to have served "clearly intoxicated patrons." This proposal by MADD has drawn a large amount of criticism, as individuals question how "clearly intoxicated" would be defined and who will be responsible for drafting the definition of an individual "clearly intoxicated."

Please take some time to visit our websites:
San Francisco DUI Attorney
San Mateo DUI Lawyer
Marin County DUI Defense
Northern California DUI Defense Lawyers
San Francisco County DUI Defense Lawyers