The Borrowed ID
A 19-year-old walks into a Michigan party store and sets a 30-pack of beer on the counter. He hands the clerk a Michigan driver's license. The license is horizontal, lists a birth date of 07/14/2001, and makes the holder 23. The photo shows a man with long hair; the customer has short hair, but the facial features are similar. There is a small tear in the laminate near the corner, and the card feels slightly thick. The clerk is alone, six people are in line, and the customer pays cash. The clerk glances at the date, sees '23,' and completes the sale. Two hours later, police report that the customer was in a crash that injured a pedestrian. The ID was borrowed from his older brother. The store has a camera system and an electronic ID scanner that was not used.
1. What ID and behavior clues should the clerk have caught, and what should the clerk have done differently?
Read the worked answer
The obvious clues are the photo mismatch (long hair in the photo, short hair on the customer), the tear in the laminate, and the slightly thick card. The clerk should have compared the face, not just the birth date, and asked for a second ID or a signature. The horizontal format and the absence of an 'Under 21 Until' field are normal for a 23-year-old in Michigan, so those are not clues by themselves. The pressure of six people in line and the cash payment are risk factors, not proof. The clerk should have used the store's electronic scanner if it was working, or refused the sale when not reasonably satisfied. A quick glance at '23' is not enough when the photo and card condition raise questions.
2. What liability does the store face, and what is the realistic strength of a 'reliable ID' defense?
Read the worked answer
The store faces criminal exposure for selling to a minor, administrative action from the MLCC, and civil dram shop exposure under MCL 436.1801 because the purchaser was a minor who later injured a pedestrian. The store may assert an affirmative defense that it reasonably relied on a bona fide ID, but that defense is weakened by the photo mismatch, the torn laminate, and the unused scanner. The defense is stronger if the ID was genuine, unexpired, and reasonably appeared to belong to the buyer; here the brother's ID was genuine but the photo did not match well. The store's written ID policy, training records, and the clerk's actual observations will matter. The pedestrian must generally give notice within 120 days under the dram shop statute.
3. What should the store preserve and do after the crash?
Read the worked answer
Preserve the camera video, the transaction log, the ID scan if any, the clerk's written statement, the training records, and the store's ID policy. Do not overwrite the video or alter the log. Notify the insurer and counsel promptly. Identify witnesses in line and the clerk's supervisor. The store should not contact the injured pedestrian directly to discuss fault. Review why the scanner was not used and whether the clerk was trained on photo comparison. The 120-day dram shop notice period and the two-year limitations period are deadlines to calendar. The goal is to reconstruct exactly what the clerk saw and did, not to create a story after the fact.