The Parking Lot Handoff
At 6:40 p.m. a 34-year-old man buys two 12-packs and a bottle of vodka at a package store. He pays cash, shows a valid license, and shows no signs of impairment. A clerk who is on break and smoking outside sees him hand one 12-pack through the passenger window of a car holding three teenagers; the driver looks young. The car leaves. The clerk mentions it to the manager, who says there is nothing to do once the customer is out the door. Two weeks earlier, a different clerk saw the same man buy beer and hand it to teenagers in the lot and said nothing. That night the 19-year-old driver runs a red light and injures a pedestrian. The pedestrian's lawyer requests the store's incident logs, the video, and all training records. The owner asks whether the store is liable and whether the clerk should have done something at the time.
1. Analyze the store's civil exposure under Florida's dram shop statute.
Read the worked answer
Start with the statute: section 768.125 protects the sale to an adult buyer, but not willful furnishing to a minor. A seller who furnishes alcohol to a person of lawful drinking age is not liable for injuries caused by that person's intoxication. On the sale itself the store is protected: the buyer was 34, sober, and showed valid identification. The handoff in the lot is where the analysis turns. Section 768.125 excepts a person who willfully and unlawfully furnishes alcohol to someone under 21, and section 562.11(1)(a) applies to any person who gives alcohol to a minor, not just licensees. The pedestrian's best theory is that the store, through its employees, knowingly allowed its lot to be used as a conduit to minors after an earlier unaddressed incident, because knowledge plus inaction is what converts a lawful sale into willful furnishing. That theory is arguable but not automatic, and the strongest claim remains against the adult who handed over the beer. Preserve the video and logs.
2. Who else is exposed, and under what legal theories?
Read the worked answer
The adult buyer is the cleanest defendant. Section 562.11(1)(a) makes it a second-degree misdemeanor for any person to give or furnish an alcoholic beverage to someone under 21, and section 768.125 removes the dram shop protection for a person who willfully and unlawfully furnishes alcohol to a minor. The buyer handed the beer through a car window to three teenagers, so knowledge of their ages is easy to establish. The 19-year-old driver faces his own exposure: a separate offense for possessing alcohol under section 562.111, adult prosecution for DUI with injury if impairment is proven, and civil liability for the pedestrian's injuries under ordinary negligence. The two clerks are unlikely defendants personally, but their statements matter. The manager's position that there is nothing to do once the customer is out the door is the weakest link in the store's defense, because it describes a policy of indifference rather than an isolated lapse by one employee.
3. What should the clerk and the manager have done at the time, and what should the store change?
Read the worked answer
Do the small things at the time, because they are the whole defense later. The clerk on break should not confront or chase anyone in the lot; that is how employees get hurt. What he should do is write down the time, the vehicle make, model, color, and tag if visible, the number and apparent ages of the occupants, and what he saw, then report it to the manager on duty during the same shift. If the driver appears impaired, call law enforcement immediately. The manager should enter it in an incident log, preserve the video, and put the buyer on a refusal list so no one sells to him again. Going forward: post lot signs, adopt a written rule against completing a sale to an adult who appears to be buying for minors, train and document the training, and brief staff that a sale is not finished when the customer walks out the door if the product is going straight into a car full of teenagers.