2020 Georgia Code
Title 3 - Alcoholic Beverages
Chapter 3 - Regulation of Alcoholic Beverages Generally
Article 2 - Prohibited Acts
§ 3-3-22. Sale or Furnishing of Alcoholic Beverages to Intoxicated Persons

No alcoholic beverage shall be sold, bartered, exchanged, given, provided, or furnished to any person who is in a state of noticeable intoxication.

(Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 103, § 15; Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., p. 283, § 1; Ga. L. 1980, p. 1206, §§ 2, 5; Code 1933, § 5A-509, enacted by Ga. L. 1980, p. 1573, § 1; Ga. L. 1981, p. 1269, § 21.)

- Liability for acts of intoxicated persons, § 51-1-40.

- For note discussing tavern keeper liability in Georgia for injury caused by a person to whom an intoxicant was sold, see 9 Ga. L. Rev. 239 (1974).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes.

- In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, annotations decided prior to the 1988 enactment of O.C.G.A. § 51-1-40, concerning liability for acts of intoxicated persons and under former Code 1993 § 58-612 are included in the annotations for this Code section.

- The legislature's intent in enacting O.C.G.A. § 3-3-22 was to provide Georgia citizens with a modicum of protection from the varied reasonably foreseeable and life-threatening risks involved in continuing to serve alcoholic beverages to noticeably intoxicated persons. Whelchel v. Laing Properties, Inc., 190 Ga. App. 182, 378 S.E.2d 478 (1989).

O.C.G.A. § 3-3-22 does not impose tort liability on dispensers of alcoholic beverages. Nunn v. Comidas Exquisitos, Inc., 166 Ga. App. 796, 305 S.E.2d 487 (1983).

- The law regarding purveyors of alcoholic beverages applies to social hosts' furnishing alcohol to their adult guests. Pirkle v. Hawley, 199 Ga. App. 371, 405 S.E.2d 71, cert. denied, 199 Ga. App. 906, 405 S.E.2d 71 (1991).

A social host may be liable to third persons for furnishing alcohol to a guest, and the social host must take some action to prevent the guest from driving once he or she is discovered to be intoxicated. Pirkle v. Hawley, 199 Ga. App. 371, 405 S.E.2d 71, cert. denied, 199 Ga. App. 906, 405 S.E.2d 71 (1991).

- Duty imposed on alcohol providers to protect third parties by not serving intoxicated patrons could not likewise be imposed on doctors treating patients; thus, the doctor did not owe a duty to decedent based on the doctor's provision of a medical certificate to the truck driver that the truck driver was physically fit to drive a commercial vehicle, in a case where the truck driver died of preexisting coronary disease three months after receiving the certificate while driving a truck and the truck then struck decedent's vehicle and killed the decedent. The doctor did not have any legal authority to restrain the truck driver for the benefit of the public, and, thus, owed no duty to the decedent to not have provided the certificate to the truck driver. Houston v. Bedgood, 263 Ga. App. 139, 588 S.E.2d 437 (2003).

- A person who encourages a noticeably intoxicated person under the legal drinking age to become further intoxicated and who furnishes to such intoxicated person more alcohol, knowing that such person will soon be driving a vehicle, is liable in tort to a person injured by the negligence of such intoxicated driver. Sutter v. Hutchings, 254 Ga. 194, 327 S.E.2d 716 (1985).

- A showing of actual knowledge that the recipient of alcohol would be driving is required in order to support a jury finding of proximate cause. Actual knowledge may be established either by direct or circumstantial evidence. Whelchel v. Laing Properties, Inc., 190 Ga. App. 182, 378 S.E.2d 478 (1989).

- Evidence was insufficient to show that any breach of duty by a bowling alley relating to alcohol was the proximate cause of the death of a passenger in a car driven by a minor who had been served beer at the bowling alley, where there was no evidence that any employee had knowledge that the minor was intoxicated or would be driving an automobile. Kalpa v. Perczak, 658 F. Supp. 235 (N.D. Ga. 1987).

- One who provides alcoholic beverages to a noticeably intoxicated person, knowing that the person will soon be driving a vehicle, may be liable for a third party's injuries caused by the negligence of the intoxicated driver. This cause of action is not limited to social host situations involving minors. Tibbs v. Studebaker's of Savannah, Inc., 184 Ga. App. 642, 362 S.E.2d 377, cert. denied, 184 Ga. App. 911, 362 S.E.2d 377 (1987).

- Whether bowling alley, which served beer to patrons, was guilty of negligence in failing to keep its premises safe for business invitees was a question for the jury and could not be properly resolved by way of summary judgment. Bishop v. Fair Lanes Ga. Bowling, Inc., 803 F.2d 1548 (11th Cir. 1986).

Whether a person was "noticeably intoxicated" was a jury question under the facts. Studebaker's of Savannah, Inc. v. Tibbs, 195 Ga. App. 142, 392 S.E.2d 908 (1990).

- In a negligence action, the trial court did not err in charging the jury that one who provides alcoholic beverages to a noticeably intoxicated person, knowing that that person will soon be driving a vehicle, may be liable for a third person's injuries caused by the negligence of the intoxicated driver, if the alcohol was a proximate cause of the injuries. Studebaker's of Savannah, Inc. v. Tibbs, 195 Ga. App. 142, 392 S.E.2d 908 (1990).

- A consumer of alcohol cannot recover damages from the provider of the alcohol for injuries caused by the consumer to a third person. Sutter v. Hutchings, 254 Ga. 194, 327 S.E.2d 716 (1985).

- The acts of employer hosting an office "Christmas party" including contracting with alcohol purveyor to obtain and pay for its services in actually furnishing and giving alcoholic beverages to party guests fell at least within the act of providing alcohol as contemplated by O.C.G.A. § 3-3-22. Whelchel v. Laing Properties, Inc., 190 Ga. App. 182, 378 S.E.2d 478 (1989).

This section is a criminal law and must be strictly construed. Henry Grady Hotel Co. v. Sturgis, 70 Ga. App. 379, 28 S.E.2d 329 (1943) (decided under former Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 103).

- This section was not enacted for purpose of protecting injured person from one who furnished money to an intoxicated person for purpose of buying whiskey. Therefore, it is not actionable negligence for one to supply money to a person noticeably intoxicated for purpose of purchasing and drinking whiskey. Henry Grady Hotel Co. v. Sturgis, 70 Ga. App. 379, 28 S.E.2d 329 (1943) ??? (decided under former Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 103).

This section does not penalize purchase or reception of beverage by intoxicated person, so a person who furnished money for purpose of purchase would not be guilty as an accessory before the fact because the person would not have procured, counseled, or commanded another to commit a crime. Henry Grady Hotel Co. v. Sturgis, 70 Ga. App. 379, 28 S.E.2d 329 (1943) (decided under former Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 103).

This section is not a law regulating businesses which sell alcoholic beverages, and city officials may not rely upon it as a basis for revoking city-issued business liquor licenses. Atlanta Attractions, Inc. v. Massell, 332 F. Supp. 914 (N.D. Ga. 1971), aff'd, 463 F.2d 449 (5th Cir. 1972) (decided under former Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 103).

This section does not create a civil cause of action. Keaton v. Kroger Co., 143 Ga. App. 23, 237 S.E.2d 443 (1977) (decided under former Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 103).

O.C.G.A. § 3-3-22 did not create a cause of action in favor of an injured adult against the seller of alcoholic beverages when injuries arose from the injured person's intoxication caused by imbibing those alcoholic beverages and when the person was noticeably intoxicated at the time the beverages were purchased. Riverside Enters., Inc. v. Rahn, 171 Ga. App. 674, 320 S.E.2d 595 (1984) (decided under former Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 103).

- Widow's wrongful death action against a bar that served alcohol to her husband for 8 hours, and who then died in a one-vehicle crash, was barred by the Dram Shop Act, O.C.G.A. § 51-1-40, which barred claims by consumers of alcohol; § 51-1-40 did not violate the separation of powers clause, Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. III, because the legislature had the authority to enact legislation codifying the common law. Dion v. Y.S.G. Enters., 296 Ga. 185, 766 S.E.2d 48 (2014).

Cited in Flores v. Exprezit! Stores 98-Georgia, LLC, 289 Ga. 466, 713 S.E.2d 368 (2011).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 45 Am. Jur. 2d, Intoxicating Liquors, §§ 218, 219, 249, 335 et seq., 393 et seq., 448 et seq.

- 48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors, § 484 et seq.

- Criminal responsibility of one authorized generally to sell intoxicating liquors for particular illegal sale thereof by employee or agent, 139 A.L.R. 306.

Entrapment to commit offense against laws regulating sales of liquor, 55 A.L.R.2d 1322.

Liability of liquor furnisher under civil damage or dramshop act for injury or death of intoxicated person from wrongful act of a third person, 65 A.L.R.2d 923.

Settlement with or release of person directly liable for injury or death as releasing liability under Civil Damage Act, 78 A.L.R.2d 998.

Liability, under dramshop acts, of one who sells or furnishes liquor otherwise than in operation of regularly established liquor business, 8 A.L.R.3d 1412.

Coverage of policy insuring against liability under dramshop acts, 14 A.L.R.3d 858.

Contributory negligence allegedly contributing to cause of injury as defense in Civil Damage Act proceeding, 64 A.L.R.3d 849.

Proof of causation of intoxication as a prerequisite to recovery under Civil Damage Act, 64 A.L.R.3d 882.

Liability of one who furnishes liquor to another for consumption by third parties, for injury caused by consumer, 64 A.L.R.3d 922.

What constitutes "sale" of liquor in violation of statute or ordinance, 89 A.L.R.3d 551.

Liability of state or municipality in tort for damages arising out of sale of intoxicating liquor by state or municipally operated liquor store or establishment, 95 A.L.R.3d 1243.

Common-law right of action for damage sustained by plaintiff in consequence of sale or gift of intoxicating liquor or habit-forming drug to another, 97 A.L.R.3d 528; 62 A.L.R.4th 16.

Liability of persons furnishing intoxicating liquor for injury to or death of consumer, outside coverage of civil damage acts, 98 A.L.R.3d 1230.

Intoxicating liquors: employer's liability for furnishing or permitting liquor on social occasion, 51 A.L.R.4th 1048.

Social host's liability for injuries incurred by third parties as a result of intoxicated guest's negligence, 62 A.L.R.4th 16.

Tort liability of college or university for injury suffered by student as a result of own or fellow student's intoxication, 62 A.L.R.4th 81.

Passenger's liability to vehicular accident victim for harm caused by intoxicated motor vehicle driver, 64 A.L.R.4th 272.

Validity, construction, and effect of statute limiting amount recoverable in dram shop action, 78 A.L.R.4th 542.

Social host's liability for death or injuries incurred by person to whom alcohol was served, 54 A.L.R.5th 313.