ANALYZE THE SITUATION 12.4 MARK HADLEY ENTERED THE Squirrel Cage Tavern at 4:00

Question

ANALYZE THE SITUATION 12.4 MARK HADLEY ENTERED THE Squirrel Cage Tavern at 4:00 P.M. on a Thursday afternoon. He sat down at the bar and, according to eyewit- nesses, uttered just a single word when approached by the bartender The one word was "draft. As the bartender had only one brand of beer on draft, she silently pulled the beer, handed it to Mr. Hadley, and accepted the $5 bill he offered in payment. Mr. Hadley left the bar some 15 minutes later having never said another word to anyone, leaving the change from his $5 on the bar counter Subsequently, Mr. Hadley was involved in an auto accident in which a ten-year-old boy was rendered sightless. The boy's parents sued the Squirrel Cage Tavern and another operation, the Dulcimer Bar. The Dulcimer Bar was sued because Mr. Hadley had consumed ten beers in three hours at that establishment prior to leaving it and driving to the Squirrel Cage. Attorneys for the Squirrel Cage argued that their client could not have known of Mr. Hadley's condition when he entered their establishment, and that they were indeed acting responsibly in that they served him only one beer. Attorneys for the injured boy countered that the Squirrel Cage served alcohol to an intoxicated person, a violation of state law, and thus under the state's dram shop legislation was responsible for Mr. Hadley's subsequent actions. 1. Did the Squirrel Cage violate the liquor laws of its state? 2. Did the Squirrel Cage bartender act responsibly in the service of alcohol to Mr. Hadley? Did she act differently from bartenders in similar situations? 3. What should the owner of the Squirrel Cage do in the future, if any- thing, to minimize the chances of reoccurrence?

Explanation / Answer

1 - Selling Alcohol to an intoxicated person by the license owner or its employee is illegal under the Liquor Control Act, here in the above-given case it is not clear that Mr Hadley was intoxicated. but the action of Mr Hadley acc to eyewitness plus the mention of another establishment The Dulcimer Bar, suggest that Mr Hadley was intoxicated, hence here the Squirrel cage tavern has violated the law.

2 - No the bartender had not acted responsibly, she just made assumptions and served beer to Mr Hadley. Here she should have confirmed and informed him about the brand they have in the bar, plus the change should have been handed over to Mr Hadley, in case he had forgotten same he should have informed. The case of serving alcohol to an intoxicated person could have been avoided if she had confirmed the brand of beer, which would have given her an opportunity to verify if Mr Hadley was intoxicated or not.

3 - Owner should provide training to the bartenders and servers on the laws and how to check signs of an intoxicated person. plus there should be tab kept on the alcohol consumed by the patron in the bar, if the consumption is unusually more, the customer should be asked to check his tab. Another major thing what owners can do is provide parking to people with drivers or people who would not consume alcohol, singles should not be given parking. Alcohol testers to be installed, where customers could voluntary check blood alcohol levels. This may not guarantee that they would avoid certain incidences, but it would surely help to lower it down.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.