Guardianship of Jacquelyn Anne Faircloth v. Main Street Entertainment, Inc.
The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question of great public importance, holding that a claim under the underage-drinker exception to the dram shop statute, section 768.125, is a 'negligence action' subject to the comparative fault statute, section 768.81, notwithstanding the statute's 'willfully and unlawfully' requirement. The Court reasoned that 'willfully' means only that the vendor knew the purchaser was underage, which does not convert the claim into an intentional tort requiring intent to injure or substantial certainty of harm. The Court expressly declined to approve or disapprove the First District's 'derivative liability' analysis of how fault may be apportioned among bars and underage patrons.
Key facts
- Guardianship action arising from injuries to an underage drinker who was served alcohol at a bar owned by Main Street Entertainment, Inc.
- Trial court rendered a judgment of $28.6 million; the case proceeded to the Florida Supreme Court on a certified question regarding whether a dram shop claim under the underage-drinker exception is subject to comparative fault apportionment.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is a major defense-side win that opens comparative fault apportionment in Florida dram shop cases involving underage patrons, eliminating joint and several liability in a category of high-exposure claims (here a… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.