KVA must surrender surveillance tapes
A Yukon Supreme Court judge has ordered the Klondike Visitors Association (KVA) to hand over surveillance tapes in a lawsuit accusing Dawson City bars of over-serving a woman who drove drunk and injured an American man.
A Yukon Supreme Court judge has ordered the Klondike Visitors Association (KVA) to hand over surveillance tapes in a lawsuit accusing Dawson City bars of over-serving a woman who drove drunk and injured an American man.
Lee Spencer, a Tennessee college professor, was severely injured in a 2009 motor vehicle collision south of Dawson.
Lucy Marshall, the driver of the other car, has already pleaded guilty to impaired driving causing bodily harm in the case.
She had a blood alcohol level nearly twice the legal limit, according to court documents.
Marshall had been drinking at the Diamond Tooth Gertie's gambling hall operated by the KVA.
She ended up at the Snake Pit, a tavern owned by the Westminster Hotel, documents say.
Spencer is suing both the KVA and the Westminster Hotel, claiming staff failed to take steps to ensure Marshall did not harm herself or others.
Spencer suffered a closed head injury, a fractured vertebrae and fractured ribs among other injuries.
In his decision made public last week, Justice Ron Veale ruled the KVA must hand over recordings from cameras taken while Marshall was at the bars.
The judge also ruled Spencer's lawyers should be allowed to question the bar manager at Diamond Tooth Gertie's regarding practices and procedures at the gambling hall.
Lawyers want to question the manager about whether bar shots were served, whether there is a manual for training bar staff and what the bar staff training would specifically entail, documents say.
Spencer has also named Marshall and unnamed waiters and waitresses as defendants in the lawsuit.
Comments (8)
Up 0 Down 0
vlad on Mar 7, 2012 at 5:00 am
Somehow I can not pass my point. We do not talk about over served people falling off they chairs. We talk about people, who have a few drinks. I am saying that no bartender can know that the person will drive, and consequently to cut him off on the second or third drink! If person does not drive, he or she can drink usually more. Everybody has a different tolerance and to cut people off for no reason is discrimination. We do have liquor law in Yukon, yes indeed. Unfortunately, it is quite archaic, despite it was overhauled just about two years ago.
Up 0 Down 0
eesmith on Mar 6, 2012 at 7:22 am
Bars and restaurants can reduce insurance rates by ensuring staff have completed responsible liquor service training and informing their insurance company that this training has been completed. "SmartServe" (ON), "Serving it Right" (BC), or "ProServe" (AB) to name a few. Some jurisdictions in Canada have even made it mandatory that people who serve alcohol take these courses. When you serve alcohol, you're serving an addictive drug, and businesses that have been granted the privilege of serving that alcohol to the public should be expected serve it in a responsible manner.
Up 0 Down 0
shenya on Mar 5, 2012 at 9:44 am
Is there not a liquor law in the Yukon?
I could be wrong but I was to understand the establishment holds some responsibility in serving very intoxicated persons. I just witnessed a server continue to serve a very inebriated person who could barely sit let alone stand in the said establishment. Then the person was nearly passed out so they decided they will help with his/her mittens and walked him/her to the door. Just letting the person out into the cold not knowing if that person will make it home.
Up 0 Down 0
Northone on Mar 5, 2012 at 8:40 am
Patrick and Vlad, you are both spot on. People should be responsible for their own conduct. No bartender even held a patron down and poured booze down their throat. There is no way a bartender or server in a busy establishment like Gertie's can be fully aware of the state of intoxication of everyone present. People need to take responsibility for their own actions and stop trying to blame others.
Up 0 Down 0
vlad on Mar 3, 2012 at 8:53 am
Dear Sidney, obviously you don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about. Bars do not make huge profits. That is the thing of the very distant past. The past when people were allowed to have a responsible good time. Now the industry is grossly over regulated and people prefer to have a good time in their closet.
Liability insurance is very expensive because of those bogus claims and the following law suits. I can go on and on. The bottom line is, the drinking age is 19 years. Those people are adults and they should be totally responsible for what they are doing!
Up 0 Down 0
Sydney McQuillin on Mar 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm
I don't agree. Bars make huge profits selling drinks. They are licensed and required to carry liability insurance. The laws of Canada say that bars can not sell drinks to people to the point of intoxication. If they do, and those people go out and harm others, a bars' liability insurer should be responsible to some degree for the harm that is caused (obviously the drinker is also responsible). If bars' insurance companies don't pay for the harm bars cause innocent people, in their quest for more and more profit, we all pay for the harm through our socialized medical and welfare programs in this country.
Imagine if you or a loved one were maimed as you drove down the road by a drunk driver and your life was ruined. Are you telling me that you would truly feel the bar where the person got drunk had no obligation to monitor the number of drinks the person had or to take steps to make sure they did not drive if the person was obviously intoxicated?
Up 0 Down 0
Vlad on Feb 29, 2012 at 7:21 am
Excellent Patrick. Different people have different tolerances to alcohol. It is sometimes very difficult to determine at what stage they are. It is also just impossible to know if they will drive, walk, or be driven by somebody else. Imagine a licensed establishment in a big city on the 15th floor with an underground parking. And you want the poor waiter to know if the client will drive. Quite idiotic isn't it, and usually quite unfair to blame the bar.
Up 0 Down 0
Patrrick on Feb 28, 2012 at 11:49 am
If a person is served too much to drink the responsibility for them driving afterwords falls 99.99% on the person who then chooses to drive- that is my opinion.
Its often difficult to determine who has drank too much alcohol, and a person who may be serving them is usually very busy- they may not even notice. And how do they know the person is driving or walking or catching a ride?