Albert T. Van Huff has successfully defended over 100 TABC dram shop investigations and dram shop lawsuits involving deaths and serious bodily injury throughout Texas, including jury trials and TABC permit suspension and cancellation hearings.
Mr. Van Huff has also successfully litigated Rule 91a Motions to Dismiss and Motions for Summary Judgment leading to the dismissal of entire cases, corporate officers, nightclub promoters, and other individuals and entities improperly named as defendants.
With over 24 years of experience in the hospitality industry and a deep understanding of Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission regulations, Monshaugen & Van Huff, P.C. is uniquely positioned to defend bars, restaurants, nightclubs, hotels, liquor stores, and other alcohol-serving establishments against dram shop liability claims.
Recent Legal Development: Raoger Corp. v. Myers (2025)
The Texas Supreme Court’s unanimous 2025 decision in Raoger Corporation v. Myers, 711 S.W.3d 206 (Tex. 2025), represents the most significant strengthening of the defense position in Texas dram shop law since the original 1987 statute.
The Court held that circumstantial evidence—such as blood alcohol calculations and expert extrapolation—cannot establish “obvious intoxication” without direct observational evidence of the patron’s condition at the time of service. This means plaintiffs can no longer rely solely on post-accident BAC testing or toxicology experts to prove their case.
Key holdings from Raoger:
- Temporal Precision Required:Â Evidence must relate specifically to the patron’s observable condition when alcohol was provided, not later manifestations of intoxication
- Direct Evidence Mandatory:Â Circumstantial evidence such as post-accident BAC testing cannot stand alone and must be coupled with direct observational evidence
- Expert Testimony Limitations:Â Opinions about how a patron “would have” appeared based solely on BAC constitute “pure speculation” and are insufficient
- Higher Evidentiary Bar:Â The Act requires proof that intoxication was “apparent to the provider,” meaning “visible; manifest; obvious” and “easily discovered, seen, or understood”
This decision provides powerful ammunition for defense counsel in summary judgment motions, expert witness challenges, and settlement negotiations.
Practice Note: Plaintiffs often plead gross negligence boilerplate. File Rule 91a or summary judgment to strike early. Use the absence of punitive exposure to reduce plaintiff’s settlement leverage.
About Monshaugen & Van Huff, P.C.
At Monshaugen & Van Huff, P.C., we pride ourselves on being Texas’ premier legal experts in dram shop defense litigation. Our team of skilled attorneys has a proven track record of successfully defending businesses against dram shop liability claims, allowing our clients to focus on their core operations with peace of mind.
Our attorneys are not only knowledgeable in Texas dram shop laws, but also possess a deep understanding of the local business landscape. This unique combination of legal and industry expertise ensures that we provide comprehensive and practical solutions to our clients.
Practice Areas
We offer a wide array of legal services tailored to meet the unique needs of Texas businesses facing dram shop liability claims:
Dram Shop Defense Litigation
Our attorneys work tirelessly to protect your business from liability claims arising from alcohol-related incidents. We meticulously examine each case to develop a robust defense strategy, striving to achieve the best possible outcome for your business. Our defense strategies include:
- Rule 91a Motions to Dismiss non-statutory claims and improperly named defendants
- Motions for Summary Judgment on Safe Harbor, causation, and obvious intoxication grounds
- Robinson/Daubert challenges to exclude unreliable expert testimony
- Responsible Third Party designations to allocate fault appropriately
- Jury trial defense with proven trial tactics
TABC Administrative Defense
We defend establishments in TABC administrative proceedings, including permit suspension and cancellation hearings arising from dram shop incidents. Our experience includes defending against allegations of serving obviously intoxicated patrons, service to minors, and other TABC violations.
Licensing and Regulatory Compliance
Our legal team provides expert guidance in obtaining and maintaining liquor licenses and ensuring compliance with Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission (TABC) regulations. We aim to help you avoid costly penalties and legal issues associated with non-compliance.
Employee Training and Education
Our attorneys offer comprehensive employee training and education programs to help your staff understand and adhere to Texas dram shop laws, reducing the risk of alcohol-related incidents and subsequent liability claims. Proper TABC-approved training is essential for establishing the Safe Harbor defense.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a dram shop lawsuit?
A dram shop lawsuit is a legal claim brought against a bar, restaurant, or other establishment that serves alcohol for the over-serving of alcohol to a patron who subsequently causes injury or death to themselves or a third party as a result of intoxication.
What are Texas dram shop laws?
Texas dram shop laws are designed to hold alcohol-serving establishments liable for over-serving patrons who later cause injury or death due to intoxication. These laws are outlined in the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, specifically Section 2.02, which sets the criteria for liability and the legal standard of care.
What is the standard of care for alcohol-serving establishments in Texas?
The standard of care for alcohol-serving establishments in Texas requires these establishments to not serve alcohol to patrons who are obviously intoxicated to the extent that they present a clear danger to themselves and others. Importantly, as the Texas Supreme Court clarified in Raoger Corp. v. Myers, this standard requires that the intoxication be apparent to the provider at the time of service—not apparent only in hindsight based on later evidence.
How does a dram shop lawsuit work in Texas?
In a Texas dram shop lawsuit, the injured party (plaintiff) must prove that the alcohol-serving establishment (defendant) served alcohol to the patron when the patron’s intoxication was obviously apparent to the provider at the time of service, and that the intoxication was a proximate cause of the damages suffered by the plaintiff.
What defenses are available in a dram shop lawsuit?
Common defenses in a dram shop lawsuit include:
- Challenging the claim that the patron was obviously intoxicated when served, particularly where plaintiff relies on circumstantial evidence without direct observations
- The Safe Harbor defense under Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 106.14
- Proving that the patron’s intoxication was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries
- Demonstrating that the plaintiff’s own negligence contributed to their injuries
- Challenging that the defendant is a statutory “provider” under the Act
- Excluding unreliable expert testimony under Robinson/Daubert
What is the Safe Harbor defense?
The Safe Harbor defense under Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 106.14 provides that an employee’s actions shall not be attributable to the employer if: (1) the employer requires employees to attend TABC-approved seller training; (2) the employee actually attended the training; and (3) the employer did not directly or indirectly encourage the employee to violate the law.
How long do I have to respond to a dram shop lawsuit in Texas?
In Texas, the statute of limitations for filing a dram shop lawsuit is generally two years from the date of injury. If you have been served with a lawsuit, you must file an answer within strict deadlines to avoid default judgment.
