Florida Injury Attorneys Blog
An important decision regarding a business’ duty to prevent over serving has been released by the 4th District Court of Appeal in the case of Stephanie De La Torre, Humberto Miranda and Carla Gallardo, Appellants, vs. Flanigan’s Enterprises, Inc d/b/a Flanigan’s Bar and Grill.
In this decision, the Plaintiffs, Stephanie De La Torre, Humberto Miranda and Carla Gallardo, were injured when their vehicle was hit by a drunk driver. The injured persons filed a complaint against Flanigan’s, which owns and operates the restaurant at which the drunk driver had been drinking at prior to the accident.
The trial court dismissed the complaint, finding that section 768.125, Florida Statutes (2011), protects businesses such as Flanigan’s from any liability for injuries caused by intoxicated patrons, as long as certain conditions are met.
The facts of this case, are unfortunately, not uncommon. The Defendant went to the restaurant, Flanigan’s, on the night of December 2, 2011. While there, the Defendant was over served by employees of Flanigan’s. The Defendant became intoxicated and the employees of Flanigan’s tried to sober the Defendant up. Later on, the Defendant left the restaurant in her own vehicle, and while on her way home, crossed into oncoming traffic, and struck the Plaintiffs’ vehicle.
An important part of this case, is the fact that Flanigan’s maintained internal policy designed to prevent drunk patrons from driving away from the business, by in effect taking the car keys away from the intoxicated patrons and insuring that the drunk patron left in either a taxi or with a sober driver.
Unfortunately, the Plaintiff action failed and the 4th District Court of Appeal affirmed that the Plaintiffs’ did not have a cause of action Flanigan’s for their purposeful intoxication of the Defendant. Section 768.125 states the following:
A person who sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person 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 who willfully and unlawfully sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person who is not of lawful drinking age or 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.
This statute makes it clear that businesses are immune from liability from over serving its patrons, even though that business may have knowledge that the patron is drunk and does nothing to stop the drunk driver from leaving its business in their own vehicle. The only exception contained in this statute, is if the business establishment gives the alcoholic beverages to a person who is not of legal drinking age, or to a person whom they know is habitually addicted to the use of any or all alcoholic beverages. Unfortunately, neither of those exceptions applied in this case, as the Defendant was of both legal drinking age, and Flanigan’s had no knowledge that the Defendant was habitually addicted to alcohol.
The Plaintiffs’ tried to circumvent statute 768.125 by stating that Flanigan’s undertook a duty to protect others from the Defendant’s action, by essentially caring for the Defendant by cutting off her access to the alcohol and their attempts to sober her up before allowing her to leave. In Florida this is called the Undertakers Doctrine as laid out in the case of Wallace v. Dean, 3 So.3d 1035, 1040 (Fla.2009). Unfortunately for the Plaintiffs’, the Fourth District of Appeals held that the Undertakers Doctrine did not apply to this case because the actions of Flanigan’s are insufficient under the multi prone test to establish liability under the Undertakers Doctrine.
The facts of each case are very important in determining if a specific case of drunk driving will be allowed to proceed against the establishment that served alcohol to the Defendant driver.
If you have a similar case, or have any additional questions related to this type of case contact us at Jo Ann Hoffman & Associates, P.A