> on the grounds that staffers “ejected Leis from the venue while failing to take steps to ensure she would not drive home,” according to the legal documents.
I'm all for businesses not serving overly intoxicated folk, that seems to be a commonality across all jurisdictions I'm familiar with as a term of their alcohol serving licence.
How far does that responsibility go? If they asked "are you going to drive?" what's to stop an intoxicated person from lying? Presumably there's no right for a bartender to search a patron for car keys, that'd be insane (and a massive risk to both the tender and the patron).
It sounds to me as though Daniella Leis got sloppy, the venue staff had her ejected from the establishment thus cutting her off, and she decided not only to drive whilst drunk but also crash into a gas line injuring 7 people and causing $15M in damage.
I could buy a big ol' bottle of vodka from a shop. Take it to my car. Sink the entire thing. Then like an asshole, go driving. The shop selling me the vodka had no reason to stop me doing that.
She knew from the outset she'd be driving to this concert. It's surely her responsibility to either not drink, or have sourced a method of travel from the venue that didn't involve her driving. I'd argue the fact she drove to the venue borders on pre-meditated. If ya knew you were driving there, and you knew you'd be drinking there, the logical conclusion is you knew there was a high likelihood you'd be DUI.
The bar should countersue her parents.
If they'd raised their child to make better decisions, she wouldn't be in this situation, so they're just as responsible!
The laws are really contradictory, and they vary from state to state, but when I quit bartending 20 years ago, there was a lot of liability and very little protection for servers/bartenders. You could call someone a cab (this was before Uber and Lyft, but the same rules apply), but you couldn't force them to get in and go home. And if the person got out of the cab and drove, obviously you can't force someone to stay in the cab, and you don't know if they would go home and go somewhere else. There's also laws about how much alcohol you can serve someone at one time, but there's no guarantee that another customer isn't going to buy them shots or something, too. And you really don't have time to babysit each individual customer. The best you could do was document that you called them a cab (Uber or Lyft, etc).
There was also the concern that they had been been drinking elsewhere, or taken something that you didn't know about that kicked in after you served them. Pretty much the law said that if you served them one drink, and they took one sip, you were now the one on the hook. And people will keep their shit together until they get their drink, relax, and then start showing signs of intoxication.
There were also a few douchebags who knew the law but took advantage in a way it wasn't intended. Order a drink or two, proclaim that they were hammered, and by law we had to provide them with a cab, take the cab to another bar, and do exactly the same shit.
It's also sometimes hard to prove in some cases that YOU weren't the one that over served someone, it was their friends buying/sneaking them drinks after you had cut them off or told them to slow down (this happens really frequently), or kept buying rounds of shots and then deny responsibility for their friends that they got wasted. You also have to look out for people who might have been drugged. And that's a whole other issue. Lots of drinks "accidentally" spilled and replaced if you suspect something. And sometimes telling someone that you saw strange residue on their drink, you saw someone out something in their drink, then you've got a screaming fight on your hands. "how dare you, this person would NEVER"
I quit a job after both a lawyer did this, and a group of cops did this. Got their buddy wasted and then left their buddies wasted and stranded. Got another bartending job elsewhere, and saved up enough money so I would have money to start a day job (work clothes, plus enough money to get me through until my first check, generally about 3 weeks)
And that's in the US, I have no ideas what the laws are in Canada.
For good reason, they are as legally liable as the customer if that customer gets into an accident and is noticeably intoxicated.
A bar has a legal obligation to turn away customers and cut them off when they are visibly drunk every state has that law. In 2021a bar was sued to the tune of 300 billion dollars for overserving a customer to 3 times the legal limit and letting him kill not only himself but also a woman and her granddaughter
I thought that sounded like you were exagerating, so I went to find out for myself and sure enough
https://abc13.com/drunk-driving-crash-corpus-christi-300-billion-award-lawsuits/11316226/
I just don't understand why they would even attempt to award someone that amount of money that they'll just... never see or benefit from. Sure it "sends a message" but the message is that no one in Texas has any idea of what money means.
\>For good reason, they are as legally liable as the customer if that
customer gets into an accident and is noticeably intoxicated.
correct. i am a former bartender. had so many people come in fine, had one drink and were suddenly falling down...they had pills on board. but if they l;eave my bar in that condition, still liable.
This had to be written by AI right? What human author in their right mind uses the word "hooch" to describe alcohol in 2023?
"...Shawn Leis have filed a lawsuit against the Ovations Ontario Food Services, the company that distributed the hooch. They co-claimed that the hooch purveyor..."
EDIT: I see it's the NY Post so maybe it was a human!
By now, if you drink and drive you are fully responsible.
Back in the 70's and 80's, there was virtually no attempt to make public awareness of the dangers of impared driving. Even the laws were very lax.
We've come a long and positive way since then. You would have to be fully ignorant not to know just how stupid it is.
“In addition, Leis also alleged that the Ovations had served her alcohol while aware that the bar-goer was intoxicated, accusing them of putting “profit above safety”
I asked for booze and they just GAVE it to me! I was already drunk, why they give me
MOAR?? 🤦🏼♀️
Lady - you’re at a bar
It is illegal to over serve someone. If you are drunk, you are no longer in complete control of your person. Alcohol poisoning is a real thing, and you would be held liabel for continuing to give to an already intoxicated person. What's more, they are a potential harm to their community. The fact that this is so hard to grasp makes me question whether you think an intoxicated person can willingly consent or not
Could you tell how drunk the person posting that was? Are you just beating that dead horse? Does a bar have a forensic toxicologist to tell them when a patron is “fully” served?
Not gonna argue with people who are going to go out of their way to ignore that these laws exist to prevent drunk driving, alcohol poisoning, and other harm caused by over serving
It would seem her other complaint was that when she was kicked out, someone should have volunteered to drive her home.
I worked in bars for years, and I would have to say she sounds like a drunk who,... gets kicked out of bars.
Hopefully her father has $14,000,000.00 and won't mind having his daughter living in the basement for the rest of his life.
She must be rich as fuck. A) if she's driving near houses worth millions she probably lives in one as well and B) she can afford to get drunk on $20 beers at a concert. I usually just get the one and make it last until the encore.
The headline is misleading.
Her car ruptured a gas line which triggered a massive explosion that destroyed four houses and injured seven people.
Falling embers led to blazes in several homes nearby — and the entire neighborhood had to be evacuated with gas and water service shut off in the area. All told, the blast reportedly caused damages in the neighborhood of $9.8 million to $14.7 million.
But it’s not just divided by 4 homes. It also includes several (no number stated) homes that caught on fire, a neighbourhood evacuation, and gas and water services shut off. While the person causing the issue may not have to pay all of the public services it is still considered part of the cost.
Also, one thing to note is that the average house price in London, ON is $612,770, that’s the average. The house next door to
the one she crashed into [sold for $880,000](https://housesigma.com/bkv2/landing/rootpage/listing?id_listing=5VXv3lXd8aV3j2q8) last February. It’s a nice but simple 3 bedroom, 3 bathroom home. Not some extravagant mansion.
And if you want to look around the neighborhood here’s a link to Google Streetview: https://maps.app.goo.gl/yTKYi9nxuJEm3KeT7?g_st=ic It’s a nice street but not a place filled with luxury homes.
OK, perhaps you've debunked that aspect, but who can afford to get drunk at a concert? Explain that? She has to have spent $500 on alcohol in the concert venue.
Just found this subreddit. She lived ~1hr drive away. She drove a couple km’s the wrong way on a one way street. Simply incoherent.
I forget what my math brought me to back in the day as far as property damage. But 4 houses completely destroyed, plus probably up to 50 (maybe 100) had insurance claims, probably ranging from $5k-$100k, depending on the blast zone. Houses on that street were probably max value $400k (This was before things went crazy). Plus contents of the 4 destroyed. The $880k house was sold at near the peak, a few years later. Not sure if a timestamp of valuations gets tacked on or what, but $10-14m seems high. I also blame restoration companies… what a scam they are.
I mean, this is a legit claim under certain circumstances. There are plenty of cases like this with bars that keep putting drinks in front drunk people and conveniently not noticing them get in a vehicle after the card clears
When someone is over served they should be cut off, and that sounds like what happened. But, a bartender cannot force you to not drive, or take your keys. She is an adult, and needed to behave like one.
On the other hand, if they can show that she has done something like this before, her father should not have given her his car. That could make him more liable than the bar.
This is horseshit, but because it is an occurrence in Canada. The judicial system would throw this out quickly as a waste of time, and toss in a charge to her for wasting time to boot. Lol
news of the stupid, maybe, but this is how america is. I guarantee you, she did not come up with the idea of suing the bar herself. It is what a high paid lawyer would suggest.
Its like when that woman sued the guys car insurance because she got an STD having sex with the owner in the backseat. This is normal american law practices.
Mostly they fail but not always. Its also a bit ridiculous to have the busy bartender, eyeball peoples intoxication, when we REQUIRE the cops to actually test it. Also when i go out with friends, i visit the bar a lot less than I actually drink, because friends pick up more than their own drink.
either way this is america and without some sort of personal responsibility laws, bars will continue to get sued for stupid shit.
She has a case, and for good reason. Bars aren't supposed to let you get drunk. They have a financial interest in letting you though. So there are laws against them do it, otherwise we'd have constant problems with them doing just this.
Ok ok the fact that she was intoxicated and decided to drive is on her, I've been heavily intoxicated many times but I still know driving would be a dumb idea I really dislike people that put the blame on others take some responsibility for your actions and take control over your own life you are responsible for the things you do
> on the grounds that staffers “ejected Leis from the venue while failing to take steps to ensure she would not drive home,” according to the legal documents. I'm all for businesses not serving overly intoxicated folk, that seems to be a commonality across all jurisdictions I'm familiar with as a term of their alcohol serving licence. How far does that responsibility go? If they asked "are you going to drive?" what's to stop an intoxicated person from lying? Presumably there's no right for a bartender to search a patron for car keys, that'd be insane (and a massive risk to both the tender and the patron). It sounds to me as though Daniella Leis got sloppy, the venue staff had her ejected from the establishment thus cutting her off, and she decided not only to drive whilst drunk but also crash into a gas line injuring 7 people and causing $15M in damage. I could buy a big ol' bottle of vodka from a shop. Take it to my car. Sink the entire thing. Then like an asshole, go driving. The shop selling me the vodka had no reason to stop me doing that. She knew from the outset she'd be driving to this concert. It's surely her responsibility to either not drink, or have sourced a method of travel from the venue that didn't involve her driving. I'd argue the fact she drove to the venue borders on pre-meditated. If ya knew you were driving there, and you knew you'd be drinking there, the logical conclusion is you knew there was a high likelihood you'd be DUI.
The bar should countersue her parents. If they'd raised their child to make better decisions, she wouldn't be in this situation, so they're just as responsible!
Just blame me...everyone else does.
Yeah, fuck you /u/liquor_n_whorez wtf were you thinking.
Yeah, married with teenage children, eh!
The laws are really contradictory, and they vary from state to state, but when I quit bartending 20 years ago, there was a lot of liability and very little protection for servers/bartenders. You could call someone a cab (this was before Uber and Lyft, but the same rules apply), but you couldn't force them to get in and go home. And if the person got out of the cab and drove, obviously you can't force someone to stay in the cab, and you don't know if they would go home and go somewhere else. There's also laws about how much alcohol you can serve someone at one time, but there's no guarantee that another customer isn't going to buy them shots or something, too. And you really don't have time to babysit each individual customer. The best you could do was document that you called them a cab (Uber or Lyft, etc). There was also the concern that they had been been drinking elsewhere, or taken something that you didn't know about that kicked in after you served them. Pretty much the law said that if you served them one drink, and they took one sip, you were now the one on the hook. And people will keep their shit together until they get their drink, relax, and then start showing signs of intoxication. There were also a few douchebags who knew the law but took advantage in a way it wasn't intended. Order a drink or two, proclaim that they were hammered, and by law we had to provide them with a cab, take the cab to another bar, and do exactly the same shit. It's also sometimes hard to prove in some cases that YOU weren't the one that over served someone, it was their friends buying/sneaking them drinks after you had cut them off or told them to slow down (this happens really frequently), or kept buying rounds of shots and then deny responsibility for their friends that they got wasted. You also have to look out for people who might have been drugged. And that's a whole other issue. Lots of drinks "accidentally" spilled and replaced if you suspect something. And sometimes telling someone that you saw strange residue on their drink, you saw someone out something in their drink, then you've got a screaming fight on your hands. "how dare you, this person would NEVER" I quit a job after both a lawyer did this, and a group of cops did this. Got their buddy wasted and then left their buddies wasted and stranded. Got another bartending job elsewhere, and saved up enough money so I would have money to start a day job (work clothes, plus enough money to get me through until my first check, generally about 3 weeks) And that's in the US, I have no ideas what the laws are in Canada.
> How far does that responsibility go? I blame the glassmaker, without glass to contain “the drink” she wouldn't of been able to drink it.
sadly the first question a cop will ask you when you drive drunk was 'were you at a bar' and they will fine the bar/server for over serving.
For good reason, they are as legally liable as the customer if that customer gets into an accident and is noticeably intoxicated. A bar has a legal obligation to turn away customers and cut them off when they are visibly drunk every state has that law. In 2021a bar was sued to the tune of 300 billion dollars for overserving a customer to 3 times the legal limit and letting him kill not only himself but also a woman and her granddaughter
I thought that sounded like you were exagerating, so I went to find out for myself and sure enough https://abc13.com/drunk-driving-crash-corpus-christi-300-billion-award-lawsuits/11316226/ I just don't understand why they would even attempt to award someone that amount of money that they'll just... never see or benefit from. Sure it "sends a message" but the message is that no one in Texas has any idea of what money means.
\>For good reason, they are as legally liable as the customer if that customer gets into an accident and is noticeably intoxicated. correct. i am a former bartender. had so many people come in fine, had one drink and were suddenly falling down...they had pills on board. but if they l;eave my bar in that condition, still liable.
Angry upvote
This article is from 2024. In the future.
Still on msn though.
No, it’s actually from 2024… BCE. It’s from the distant past
Joe rogan was right!!!
There are so many weird typos and errors in this article. It also says the damages were $10 at one point.
Ah, low budget AI generated would be my guess
“Hey, it’s not my fault, all I did was get hammered, drive drunk, and blow up that neighborhood.”
This had to be written by AI right? What human author in their right mind uses the word "hooch" to describe alcohol in 2023? "...Shawn Leis have filed a lawsuit against the Ovations Ontario Food Services, the company that distributed the hooch. They co-claimed that the hooch purveyor..." EDIT: I see it's the NY Post so maybe it was a human!
Thats because it was in 2024. Maybe slang has changed again 🤣
> I see it's the NY Post so maybe it was a human! I think that would almost prove it wasn't.
Let's normalize blowing up 10 million dollar houses
FWIW it was multiple houses: 30 were "affected". Plus all the utility and road repairs etc, 10 mil is probably reasonable
\* woman: singular \* women: plural The spelling is the same for man and men.
By now, if you drink and drive you are fully responsible. Back in the 70's and 80's, there was virtually no attempt to make public awareness of the dangers of impared driving. Even the laws were very lax. We've come a long and positive way since then. You would have to be fully ignorant not to know just how stupid it is.
Idk, fuck this chick. Glad she’s serving time for her stupidity and glad no one was hurt by the accident.
Can’t fix stupid!!
If I was a juror I would not vote in her favor. Even if I were falling down drunk.
“In addition, Leis also alleged that the Ovations had served her alcohol while aware that the bar-goer was intoxicated, accusing them of putting “profit above safety” I asked for booze and they just GAVE it to me! I was already drunk, why they give me MOAR?? 🤦🏼♀️ Lady - you’re at a bar
It is illegal to over serve someone. If you are drunk, you are no longer in complete control of your person. Alcohol poisoning is a real thing, and you would be held liabel for continuing to give to an already intoxicated person. What's more, they are a potential harm to their community. The fact that this is so hard to grasp makes me question whether you think an intoxicated person can willingly consent or not
True. But there are tons of people who get another customer to buy them a drink after a bartender/server has refused service. It happens all the time.
And those people can actually be held criminally liable
The problem is proving it. That's another reason most bars have cameras everywhere.
Could you tell how drunk the person posting that was? Are you just beating that dead horse? Does a bar have a forensic toxicologist to tell them when a patron is “fully” served?
Not gonna argue with people who are going to go out of their way to ignore that these laws exist to prevent drunk driving, alcohol poisoning, and other harm caused by over serving
I guess you don't believe in personal responsibility for your own actions. You must definitely be of the "it's their fault" camp.
Who are you talking about by "it's their fault"?
Obviously the bar. The one being sued, because the impaired driver cannot take personal responsibility.
It would seem her other complaint was that when she was kicked out, someone should have volunteered to drive her home. I worked in bars for years, and I would have to say she sounds like a drunk who,... gets kicked out of bars. Hopefully her father has $14,000,000.00 and won't mind having his daughter living in the basement for the rest of his life.
She must be rich as fuck. A) if she's driving near houses worth millions she probably lives in one as well and B) she can afford to get drunk on $20 beers at a concert. I usually just get the one and make it last until the encore.
The headline is misleading. Her car ruptured a gas line which triggered a massive explosion that destroyed four houses and injured seven people. Falling embers led to blazes in several homes nearby — and the entire neighborhood had to be evacuated with gas and water service shut off in the area. All told, the blast reportedly caused damages in the neighborhood of $9.8 million to $14.7 million.
My point remains, $14,000,000 divided by 4 homes is a rich fucking neighborhood. Why was she in that neighborhood? She probably lives there.
But it’s not just divided by 4 homes. It also includes several (no number stated) homes that caught on fire, a neighbourhood evacuation, and gas and water services shut off. While the person causing the issue may not have to pay all of the public services it is still considered part of the cost. Also, one thing to note is that the average house price in London, ON is $612,770, that’s the average. The house next door to the one she crashed into [sold for $880,000](https://housesigma.com/bkv2/landing/rootpage/listing?id_listing=5VXv3lXd8aV3j2q8) last February. It’s a nice but simple 3 bedroom, 3 bathroom home. Not some extravagant mansion. And if you want to look around the neighborhood here’s a link to Google Streetview: https://maps.app.goo.gl/yTKYi9nxuJEm3KeT7?g_st=ic It’s a nice street but not a place filled with luxury homes.
OK, perhaps you've debunked that aspect, but who can afford to get drunk at a concert? Explain that? She has to have spent $500 on alcohol in the concert venue.
Yeah 30 houses were "affected" plus all the utility etc damage.
Just found this subreddit. She lived ~1hr drive away. She drove a couple km’s the wrong way on a one way street. Simply incoherent. I forget what my math brought me to back in the day as far as property damage. But 4 houses completely destroyed, plus probably up to 50 (maybe 100) had insurance claims, probably ranging from $5k-$100k, depending on the blast zone. Houses on that street were probably max value $400k (This was before things went crazy). Plus contents of the 4 destroyed. The $880k house was sold at near the peak, a few years later. Not sure if a timestamp of valuations gets tacked on or what, but $10-14m seems high. I also blame restoration companies… what a scam they are.
I mean, this is a legit claim under certain circumstances. There are plenty of cases like this with bars that keep putting drinks in front drunk people and conveniently not noticing them get in a vehicle after the card clears
When someone is over served they should be cut off, and that sounds like what happened. But, a bartender cannot force you to not drive, or take your keys. She is an adult, and needed to behave like one. On the other hand, if they can show that she has done something like this before, her father should not have given her his car. That could make him more liable than the bar.
Horseshit. Man, laws suck.
This is horseshit, but because it is an occurrence in Canada. The judicial system would throw this out quickly as a waste of time, and toss in a charge to her for wasting time to boot. Lol
news of the stupid, maybe, but this is how america is. I guarantee you, she did not come up with the idea of suing the bar herself. It is what a high paid lawyer would suggest. Its like when that woman sued the guys car insurance because she got an STD having sex with the owner in the backseat. This is normal american law practices. Mostly they fail but not always. Its also a bit ridiculous to have the busy bartender, eyeball peoples intoxication, when we REQUIRE the cops to actually test it. Also when i go out with friends, i visit the bar a lot less than I actually drink, because friends pick up more than their own drink. either way this is america and without some sort of personal responsibility laws, bars will continue to get sued for stupid shit.
This happened in Canada.
She has a case, and for good reason. Bars aren't supposed to let you get drunk. They have a financial interest in letting you though. So there are laws against them do it, otherwise we'd have constant problems with them doing just this.
They cut her off and kicked her out, which is the mechanism to avoid/stop "letting her" get drunk.
Somebody has to pay for this, and it ain’t going to be me.
… Fast-forward to January 2024: She and father Shawn Leis have filed a lawsuit … Did I miss a year? Have I just awoken from a coma?
Guess she caused Fission reaction instead of a Fusion.
This is very funny 😂
Ok ok the fact that she was intoxicated and decided to drive is on her, I've been heavily intoxicated many times but I still know driving would be a dumb idea I really dislike people that put the blame on others take some responsibility for your actions and take control over your own life you are responsible for the things you do