Stop Injury Claims: Michigan Liquor License Defense
Michigan licensees can face civil suits for unlawful alcohol sales and MLCC administrative exposure. This guide outlines risk points under Michigan’s dram shop law, practical steps to preserve evidence, and defense strategies to protect your business and license. For urgent help, contact us now.
Contact our Michigan liquor liability defense team
Who Is at Risk and Why It Matters
On-premises licensees (bars, restaurants, clubs), off-premises retailers, and special license holders can be named in lawsuits when claimants allege a sale to a minor or a visibly intoxicated person. In addition to civil exposure, the Michigan Liquor Control Commission (MLCC) may pursue administrative action that can result in fines, suspension, or even revocation of the license if violations are proven.
Understanding Michigan Exposure for Alcohol-Related Injuries
Michigan’s dram shop statute allows certain injured parties to sue retail licensees for an unlawful sale that is a proximate cause of injury or death. See MCL 436.1801. Unlawful sales commonly at issue include sales to minors and sales to persons who are visibly intoxicated. Prohibitions also appear elsewhere in the Liquor Control Code (e.g., MCL 436.1701). Dram shop claims have statutory prerequisites, including a written notice requirement; failure to comply can be case-dispositive. See MCL 436.1801.
Civil litigation often proceeds in parallel with MLCC scrutiny. The Commission has authority to impose administrative penalties for violations of the Liquor Control Code or rules. See MCL 436.1903 and the MLCC.
Early Response: Preserve Evidence and Control the Narrative
In the first 24-72 hours, disciplined action can materially improve your position and reduce the risk of discovery sanctions:
- Preserve surveillance video, POS data, receipts, seating charts, duty rosters, training logs, and incident reports.
- Secure timely statements from staff and patrons while memories are fresh.
- Issue a litigation hold to suspend routine deletion of ESI and camera footage. Michigan Court Rules authorize sanctions for failure to preserve relevant electronically stored information. See MCR 2.313 (including 2.313(E)).
- Route claimant, insurer, and media inquiries through counsel to avoid admissions.
- Notify your insurer promptly and follow any panel-counsel or consent-to-settle clauses.
Key Defenses We Evaluate
- No unlawful sale: The patron was not visibly intoxicated at service; documented refusals; adherence to written policies (see MCL 436.1801).
- Causation breaks: Independent intervening acts; significant time gaps; alternative alcohol sources undermining proximate cause.
- Identity/attribution: Misidentification of premises or server; lack of proof your establishment made the sale.
- Comparative fault and nonparty at fault: Allocation among all actors under MCL 600.2957; timely nonparty-at-fault notice under MCR 2.112(K).
- Statutory compliance: Enforcing dram shop notice requirements (see MCL 436.1801).
- Evidentiary challenges: Excluding unreliable expert opinions under MCL 600.2955; addressing spoliation arguments consistent with MCR 2.313.
- Training/policy proof: Producing credible training records, service logs, and refusal documentation to rebut overservice allegations.
Compliance Practices That Reduce Claims
- Written alcohol service policy (ID checks, cut-offs, transportation options, and documentation).
- Regular server training with refreshers; retain certificates and attendance logs.
- Visible intoxication protocols (observable indicators checklist; manager sign-off).
- Incident reporting (same-shift completion; supervisor review).
- Technology: camera coverage of entrances, bars, and POS; aligned retention schedules; accurate POS time sync.
- Vendor coordination: calibrated ID scanners; periodic POS receipt audits.
- Minor access controls: door checks, event wristbands, and family-dining separation during peak hours. Remember that sales to under-21 and to visibly intoxicated persons are prohibited. See MCL 436.1701 and MCL 436.1801.
Practical tips
- Stage a quarterly mock ID-check drill and document results.
- Place a refusal-of-service log at each bar station and review weekly.
- Sync camera and POS clocks monthly to simplify timelines.
Incident response checklist
- Issue litigation hold and secure video for at least 48 hours before/after the event.
- Export POS receipts and tab histories for the full shift.
- Collect staff schedules and certify who was on duty.
- Obtain written witness statements before the next shift.
- Notify carrier and tender the claim in writing.
- Direct all third-party contacts to counsel.
Working with the MLCC
Coordinate with counsel before responding to MLCC inquiries or inspections. Verify books, records, and server permits are current and accessible. Where appropriate, implement corrective actions (policy updates, supplemental training, managerial adjustments). The Commission may impose fines or suspend/revoke a license for proven violations. See MCL 436.1903.
Insurance Coordination
Review liquor liability and CGL coverage, notice provisions, and any consent-to-settle language. Align defense strategy with carrier expectations without compromising your license position. If multiple insureds are implicated, address conflicts early and consider independent counsel.
When a Claim Is Filed: Our Defense Playbook
- Immediate site assessment and evidence preservation.
- Witness interviews and affidavit preparation.
- Forensic timeline using receipts, video, and toxicology assumptions.
- Expert retention on service standards and human factors.
- Motion practice targeting defective pleadings and unsupported theories.
- Parallel MLCC strategy to protect licensure while litigation proceeds.
- Resolution strategy calibrated to evidence and insurance dynamics.
How We Help
We defend Michigan licensees against alcohol-related injury claims and MLCC actions—tailored to your operations, from local taverns to multi-location groups and event venues. If you’ve received a demand letter, lawsuit, or MLCC inquiry, contact counsel immediately to preserve privileges and critical evidence.
FAQ
What is a visibly intoxicated person under Michigan law?
It refers to observable signs of intoxication apparent to a reasonable server, such as slurred speech, unsteady gait, or impaired coordination. Documentation of observations helps rebut claims.
How long should I keep video and POS data?
Immediately issue a litigation hold and preserve all relevant data once an incident is known. Consult counsel for a retention scope; err on preserving more rather than less.
Do I need to notify my insurer even if I think the claim is weak?
Yes. Most policies require prompt notice. Late notice can jeopardize coverage.
Can training records really make a difference?
Yes. Credible training and refusal logs can support defenses that no unlawful sale occurred and that staff followed policy.
Key legal references
- MCL 436.1801 (Dram shop liability; unlawful sale; notice)
- MCL 436.1903 (MLCC administrative sanctions)
- MCL 436.1701 (Sale to under-21 prohibited)
- MCL 600.2957 (Allocation of fault; nonparty at fault)
- MCL 600.2955 (Expert opinion reliability)
- Michigan Court Rules (see MCR 2.313 on ESI preservation; MCR 2.112(K) on nonparty at fault)
- Michigan Liquor Control Commission (Official guidance and enforcement)
Talk to a Michigan liquor license defense attorney today
Disclaimer: This post provides general information about Michigan liquor liability and license defense. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws change and outcomes depend on specific facts—consult a licensed Michigan attorney about your situation.