Common Mistakes Bars Make That Can Lead to Dram Shop Lawsuits in Illinois

Serving alcohol is a business, but it also carries significant legal responsibilities. Bars, restaurants, taverns, nightclubs, breweries, and other establishments that sell alcoholic beverages in Illinois must comply with state liquor laws and take reasonable steps to prevent unlawful sales. When an intoxicated customer leaves an establishment and causes a crash or otherwise injures another person, questions may arise about whether the establishment’s conduct contributed to the intoxication and resulting injury.

Illinois has a statutory cause of action commonly referred to as the Dram Shop Act. Under 235 ILCS 5/6-21, a person injured in Illinois by an intoxicated person may have a claim against a person licensed to sell alcoholic liquor when the sale or gift of alcohol caused the person’s intoxication. The statute establishes specific requirements and limits for these claims.

Not every accident involving a person who drank at a bar creates liability. Illinois dram shop claims are governed by specific statutory rules, including statutory damage limitations that are adjusted periodically. Nevertheless, bars can create substantial legal exposure by failing to follow Illinois liquor laws, inadequately training employees, serving people who are visibly intoxicated, serving minors, or failing to maintain adequate records. Understanding common mistakes can help explain how alcohol-service practices can become important evidence in a dram shop lawsuit.

“When an intoxicated driver causes a serious crash, the investigation should not necessarily end with the driver. We need to determine where the driver consumed alcohol, what was served, and whether the evidence supports a claim against an establishment that contributed to the intoxication.” — John J. Malm, Naperville car accident attorney

Alcohol-Related Crashes Remain a Serious Problem in Illinois

The consequences of impaired driving can be devastating. According to the Illinois Department of Transportation’s 2024 Illinois Crash Facts, Illinois experienced 1,085 fatal crashes in 2024, and 20.4% of those fatal crashes involved alcohol. A total of 1,178 people were killed in Illinois motor vehicle crashes that year.

IDOT’s statewide crash trends also reported 228 alcohol-related fatal crashes in 2024, involving 256 fatalities and 154 injuries. Among the fatalities in those alcohol-related crashes, 203 involved drivers with a blood alcohol concentration of .08 or greater.

These statistics do not establish that a particular bar caused any particular crash. They do, however, demonstrate the seriousness of alcohol-impaired driving and why Illinois imposes legal restrictions on the sale and service of alcoholic beverages.

What Is an Illinois Dram Shop Lawsuit?

Illinois’ Dram Shop Act provides a statutory cause of action against certain alcohol sellers when their sale or gift of alcohol causes intoxication that results in injury or property damage. Section 6-21 states that a person injured in Illinois by an intoxicated person may bring an action against a person licensed to sell alcoholic liquor when the sale or gift of alcohol causes the intoxication. The law is different from an ordinary negligence claim against a drunk driver.

In a typical motor vehicle case, the injured person may argue that the driver was negligent, for example, by driving under the influence, speeding, or failing to maintain control of the vehicle. A dram shop claim instead examines the conduct of the alcohol provider and whether the statutory requirements for liability are satisfied. Potential evidence in a dram shop case may include:

• Receipts and credit-card records.
• Bar tabs.
• Video surveillance.
• Employee statements.
• Witness testimony.
• Social-media posts.
• Police reports.
• Toxicology and blood-alcohol evidence.
• The driver’s statements about where alcohol was consumed.
• Statements from other patrons.
• Training records.
• Establishment policies.
• Incident reports.
• Evidence concerning the number and timing of drinks served.

Mistake #1: Serving an Intoxicated Customer

One of the most significant mistakes an establishment can make is continuing to serve a customer who is already intoxicated. Illinois law expressly prohibits a licensee, or its agents or employees, from selling, giving, or delivering alcoholic liquor to an intoxicated person, subject to statutory exceptions.

Recognizing intoxication can be challenging. A customer may not appear obviously impaired when receiving the first drink but may become increasingly impaired as the evening progresses. Bartenders and servers should therefore be trained to recognize signs such as:

• Slurred speech.
• Difficulty maintaining balance.
• Aggressive or unusually emotional behavior.
• Falling asleep at the bar.
• Repeatedly dropping objects.
• Difficulty handling money or payment cards.
• Significant changes in speech or behavior.
• Ordering drinks unusually quickly.
• Difficulty standing or walking.
• Confusion or disorientation.

Continuing to serve alcohol after obvious signs of intoxication can become important evidence in subsequent litigation.

Mistake #2: Failing to Train Bartenders and Servers

A bar’s alcohol-service policies are only useful if employees understand and follow them. A common problem occurs when an establishment gives employees little or no meaningful training about identifying intoxicated customers, checking identification, refusing service, documenting incidents, or involving a manager when a customer becomes impaired.

Training should address both legal requirements and practical situations employees are likely to encounter. Effective training may cover:

• Illinois alcohol-service laws.
• Identification requirements.
• Recognizing signs of intoxication.
• Refusing service professionally.
• Preventing customers from purchasing drinks for intoxicated patrons.
• Handling fake identification.
• Responding to aggressive or impaired customers.
• Contacting management.
• Documenting significant incidents.
• Arranging transportation when appropriate.
• Preserving surveillance footage after an incident.

A written policy that employees do not follow may provide little protection. Establishments should be able to demonstrate that employees were actually trained and that managers enforced the policies.

Mistake #3: Serving Alcohol to Someone Under 21

Serving alcohol to a person under 21 can create serious legal consequences. Illinois law prohibits a licensee and its employees from selling, giving, or delivering alcoholic liquor to a person under 21. The statute also requires a licensee or employee who believes there is reason to believe a prospective recipient is underage to demand acceptable identification establishing age before making the sale or delivery.

Failure to properly verify identification can therefore become significant evidence in a lawsuit, particularly when an underage customer later becomes intoxicated and causes an injury. Bars should have clear policies addressing:

• When identification must be checked.
• What forms of identification are acceptable.
• How employees should handle questionable identification.
• Whether employees should involve a manager.
• How employees should document suspected fake IDs.
• Procedures for preventing underage patrons from obtaining drinks through another customer.

Simply posting an “ID required” sign is not a substitute for effective compliance procedures.

Mistake #4: Allowing Customers to Buy Drinks for Intoxicated Patrons

A customer who has become intoxicated may stop ordering drinks personally but continue receiving alcohol from friends or other patrons. Bars should have procedures addressing situations in which one patron repeatedly purchases drinks for another person who appears impaired. Employees should pay attention to patterns such as:

• Multiple drinks being purchased for one customer.
• Friends ordering shots for an increasingly intoxicated patron.
• An intoxicated customer receiving drinks from multiple people.
• Patrons attempting to conceal who is actually consuming the alcohol.
• A customer becoming visibly impaired while others continue buying drinks for them.

Employees who observe these circumstances should understand when to involve a manager and when to refuse further service.

Mistake #5: Failing to Monitor Alcohol Consumption

Another common problem is treating each drink transaction as an isolated event. A customer may purchase one drink from one bartender, another drink from a second bartender, and several additional drinks from servers or other employees. If nobody communicates, employees may not recognize how much alcohol the customer has consumed. Good internal procedures can reduce this problem. Bars may consider:

• Using centralized point-of-sale systems.
• Tracking tabs consistently.
• Communicating between bartenders and servers.
• Training employees to recognize repeat orders.
• Having managers monitor visibly impaired customers.
• Establishing clear service-cutoff procedures.

The goal is not necessarily to prevent customers from drinking alcohol. It is to prevent employees from continuing to serve customers when doing so violates Illinois law or the establishment’s safety policies.

Mistake #6: Failing to Preserve Surveillance Video

Surveillance footage can be extraordinarily important in dram shop litigation. Many establishments have cameras covering bars, entrances, exits, parking lots, and other portions of the premises. That footage may show how a customer appeared before leaving, who served the customer, how many transactions occurred, whether the person was visibly impaired, and whether employees attempted to stop further service. The problem is that surveillance systems frequently overwrite older footage.

If a serious crash occurs after a customer leaves a bar, the establishment may have no reason to preserve footage unless someone recognizes its potential significance. Once the recording is overwritten, recovering it may be impossible. Important evidence can include:

• Bar-area video.
• Point-of-sale records.
• Entrance and exit video.
• Parking-lot footage.
• Credit-card receipts.
• Employee schedules.
• Incident reports.

Preserving this information quickly can be critical.

Mistake #7: Ignoring Obvious Signs That a Customer Should Not Drive

Employees may sometimes observe an intoxicated customer attempting to leave by vehicle. An employee should not physically restrain a customer except where legally appropriate, but establishments can implement policies for responding to potentially dangerous situations. Depending on the circumstances, employees may offer to arrange transportation, contact a manager, call a rideshare service, contact law enforcement, or take other appropriate measures.

A business’s response after deciding to stop serving someone may become relevant evidence in litigation. The important point is that the establishment should have a consistent policy rather than leaving every employee to improvise.

Mistake #8: Poor Documentation After an Incident

Another mistake is failing to document what happened after a potentially significant alcohol-service incident. Suppose an employee refuses to serve a customer because the customer appears intoxicated. The customer becomes angry, leaves, and later causes a collision. If the establishment has no incident report, the details may become difficult to establish later. An incident report may document:

• The customer’s behavior.
• What employees observed.
• When service was stopped.
• Who was present.
• Whether the customer left on foot or in a vehicle.
• Whether transportation was offered.
• Whether management was notified.
• Whether law enforcement was contacted.

Documentation should be factual and objective rather than speculative.

Mistake #9: Assuming the Bar Cannot Be Sued Because the Customer Was the One Who Drove

This is one of the most important misconceptions surrounding dram shop cases. The intoxicated driver may be primarily responsible for causing a collision, but Illinois law provides a separate statutory cause of action against qualifying alcohol sellers under certain circumstances. Section 6-21 expressly provides a right of action against a licensed seller when its sale or gift of alcohol causes the intoxication of the person who causes the injury.

A dram shop claim does not necessarily replace a claim against the intoxicated driver. Depending on the circumstances, multiple defendants and multiple legal theories may need to be evaluated.

What Evidence Is Important in a Dram Shop Lawsuit?

Dram shop cases can turn on evidence showing what happened before the intoxicated person left the establishment. Potentially important evidence includes:

• Surveillance footage.
• Receipts and credit-card transactions.
• Bar tabs.
• Employee schedules.
• Training materials.
• Internal alcohol-service policies.
• Witness statements.
• Police reports.
• Medical records.
• Toxicology reports.
• Statements from the intoxicated driver.
• Social-media evidence.
• Cellphone evidence when legally obtainable.
• Photographs of the accident scene and vehicles.

An investigation may also seek evidence from other establishments if the driver visited multiple locations before the crash.

What Should an Injured Person Do After a Crash Involving an Intoxicated Driver?

If you have been injured by an intoxicated driver, seek medical attention immediately and report the collision to law enforcement. If possible, document the accident scene and identify witnesses. You should also preserve information about where the driver may have been drinking. Important steps can include:

• Obtain the police crash report.
• Ask whether the driver was arrested or cited for DUI.
• Preserve medical records and bills.
• Photograph injuries and property damage.
• Identify witnesses.
• Document lost wages.
• Save insurance correspondence.
• Determine where the driver was drinking before the crash.
• Preserve photographs, video, and other evidence.
• Speak with an attorney before evidence is lost or surveillance footage is overwritten.

A dram shop investigation may require acting quickly because businesses may have limited surveillance-retention periods.

Frequently Asked Questions About Illinois Dram Shop Lawsuits

Can a bar be liable if a customer gets drunk and causes a car accident?

Potentially. Illinois’ Dram Shop Act permits certain claims against licensed alcohol sellers when their sale or gift of alcohol causes the intoxication of a person who subsequently injures someone. Specific statutory requirements and limitations apply.

Is a bar liable every time an intoxicated customer causes an accident?

No. A person’s intoxication alone does not automatically establish liability against a bar. The statutory requirements for a dram shop claim must be satisfied, and the facts concerning the sale or provision of alcohol must be investigated.

Can a bar be liable for serving someone who is visibly intoxicated?

Potentially. Illinois law prohibits a licensee or its employees from selling, giving, or delivering alcohol to an intoxicated person, subject to statutory exceptions.

What if the bar served alcohol to someone under 21?

Serving alcohol to someone under 21 is prohibited under Illinois law, subject to statutory exceptions. A violation may become important evidence in a subsequent injury claim.

How can I prove where the drunk driver was drinking?

Evidence may include receipts, credit-card records, bar tabs, surveillance footage, witness testimony, social-media posts, police reports, and statements made by the driver or other witnesses.

How important is surveillance footage?

It can be extremely important. Video may show the customer’s appearance, interactions with employees, service of alcohol, departure from the establishment, and whether the person appeared impaired. Because footage may be automatically overwritten, preserving it promptly can be critical.

Can I sue both the drunk driver and the bar?

Depending on the facts, potentially. A claim against an intoxicated driver and a statutory dram shop claim against an alcohol provider are legally distinct and should be evaluated separately.

Contact the 5-Star Rated Illinois Drunk Driving Accident Lawyers at John J. Malm & Associates

An alcohol-related crash can leave victims facing catastrophic injuries, mounting medical expenses, lost income, and profound emotional consequences. While the intoxicated driver may be responsible for the collision, Illinois law can provide an additional avenue of recovery when the facts support a dram shop claim. Establishing that claim requires more than proving that the driver had been drinking. It may require reconstructing the driver’s activities before the crash, identifying the establishments that served alcohol, obtaining surveillance footage and transaction records, determining what employees observed, and evaluating the requirements and limitations of Illinois’ Dram Shop Act.

At John J. Malm & Associates, we investigate serious injury and wrongful death cases involving alcohol-related crashes and work to identify all potentially responsible parties. If you or a loved one has been injured because of an intoxicated driver, contact our firm as soon as possible for a free consultation. The evidence needed to pursue a dram shop claim can disappear quickly, particularly surveillance footage and electronic transaction records. Contact our firm to discuss your accident, the circumstances surrounding the driver’s intoxication, and your potential legal options for pursuing compensation.