Originally posted by no1marauderBack to square one. The Bar- rest. is respondsible.
Really?
Florida’s Dram Shop Law does allow the victims of drink driving accidents to sue bars, hotels or restaurants that sell alcohol to underage teens who are injured or injure others as a result, [b]if the bar either didn’t ask for an ID or ignored an obviously fake ID.
http://seelielaw.com/blog/archives/181/comment-page-1[/b]
Originally posted by no1marauderAn affirmative defense is not an absolute defense.
That is just not correct in NY.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Act 65(4):
In any
proceeding pursuant to subdivision one of this section, it shall be an
affirmative defense that such person had produced a photographic
identification card apparently issued by a governmental entity and that
the alcoholic bev ...[text shortened]... uch identification.
http://law.onecle.com/new-york/alcoholic-beverage-control/ABC065_65.html
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 23348
Originally posted by no1marauderwell i'm not sure about that, seems it's the responsibility of the driver in that case if xe is over 21, as it should be. no, i had a quite lengthily conversation with a bar owner in miami about this and he in formed me of a warning and a small fine given to him because he served a few 18/19 year olds with fake ids who ended up getting drunk and causing trouble, he wasn't charged with anything to do with what damage they can done (something about someones car that was parked, can't remember exactly) but because of this he was apparently getting more random stops by police to make sure everyone was 21+.
Really?
Florida’s Dram Shop Law does allow the victims of drink driving accidents to sue bars, hotels or restaurants that sell alcohol to underage teens who are injured or injure others as a result, [b]if the bar either didn’t ask for an ID or ignored an obviously fake ID.
http://seelielaw.com/blog/archives/181/comment-page-1[/b]
basically it all started because i didn't have id on me and didn't want to walk the whole two 2 mins to go and get it.
Originally posted by trev33The bar has an a duty to all reasonable precautions to avoid selling liquor to under age minors.
that's what i'm saying to.
although it may be different from state to state in america as no1twit has said, i don't know.
from past experience it's the bars responsibilities in florida.
It would not be a legal defense when the minor buys the booze and injures himself and others for the liquor store to argue that the minor lacked the capacity to enter into a contract of sale, as defrauder seeks to imply in his RHP analogy.
And frankly, liquor laws are a bad comparison to the original deiscussion.
Originally posted by Red NightAn affirmative defense simply means that the burden of proof is on the party asserting the defense. If the evidence submitted supports the defense however the defendant will be exonerated.
An affirmative defense is not an absolute defense.
What law school did you go to BTW? You should get your money back.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 23348
Originally posted by Very Rustyhow many pennies a day?
A lawyer was not needed. Come on it is a chess site with forums on it. That we pay pennys a day for. 😉
There are some contracts, you or I could not understand unless we are lawyers. Some are very complicated, it only takes a word to change the whole meaning of something, and once signed, it is legally binding.
Sorry to hear about your problem with dyslexia, if you are telling the truth, if not shame on you!
i know, travel insurance is one of them. don't think i'll bother next time they always find a way to weasel out of paying anything.
it's a real pain in the ass i'm telling you. i would've bother coming on here if it wasn't for spell checker.
Originally posted by no1marauderI frequent a bar that has been busted for negligence. I.E. serving minors tobaco and beer involving fake ID. if you prvode fake ID you are in violation of the law. The bar losses snd so does the partcipiant
IF:
the bar either didn’t ask for an ID or ignored an obviously fake ID.
Originally posted by Red NightYou are either very stupid or extremely disingenuous or both.
The bar has an a duty to all reasonable precautions to avoid selling liquor to under age minors.
It would not be a legal defense when the minor buys the booze and injures himself and others for the liquor store to argue that the minor lacked the capacity to enter into a contract of sale, as defrauder seeks to imply in his RHP analogy.
And frankly, liquor laws are a bad comparison to the original deiscussion.
That the minor lacked capacity would not be a defense. But in Florida the statute specifically provides that if the bar owner took the legally required reasonable precaution - i.e. asked for and received an apparently valid ID - he would be immune from liability.
Similarly, someone who defrauded this site by claiming to be of legal age to enter a binding contract and was not, could not claim to be damaged by content that he only gained access to by fraud.
Got it now, jailhouse lawyer?
Originally posted by YEAH BOYI don't know what state you are in, but if you are in NY or Florida, you are wrong as the links I provided clearly show.
I frequent a bar that has been busted for negligence. I.E. serving minors tobaco and beer involving fake ID. if you prvode fake ID you are in violation of the law. The bar losses snd so does the partcipiant