Supreme Court of Texas hears dispute over dram‑shop liability in Raegar Corp. v. Myers

The Supreme Court of Texas heard oral argument over whether a seller of alcoholic beverages is entitled to summary judgment when the record lacks evidence the patron "appeared obviously intoxicated to the extent that he presented a clear danger to himself and others." Petitioner’s counsel, Steve Knight, argued the restaurant was entitled to judgment because “every witness knowledgeable about how the patron appeared both at the restaurant and after the restaurant confirmed that he looked and acted normal.”

The issue matters, the justices were told, because the state’s dram‑shop law imposes liability only when intoxication is apparent at the time of service; other measures, such as later blood‑alcohol readings, do not by themselves satisfy that statutory benchmark. "The legislature based liability solely and exclusively on how the patron appeared at the time of service," Knight said, adding that "the statute says we're only liable if at the time that we provide the alcohol...how did this man look?" Knight urged the court to reverse the court of appeals and render…