DRAM SHOP LIABILITY COMPLAINT — VIRGINIA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Critical Jurisdictional Warning
2. Caption
3. Parties
4. Jurisdiction and Venue
5. Factual Allegations
6. Count I — Direct Negligence (Limited Alternative Theory)
7. Damages
8. Jury Demand
9. Prayer for Relief
10. State-Specific Notes

CRITICAL JURISDICTIONAL WARNING

VIRGINIA DOES NOT RECOGNIZE DRAM SHOP LIABILITY.

Virginia is one of a small number of states that continues to follow the common law rule under which the act of selling or serving alcoholic beverages is considered too remote to be a proximate cause of an injury resulting from the consumer's subsequent conduct.

Key Principles:
- The Virginia Supreme Court has consistently held that the consumption of alcohol, not the furnishing, is the legal cause of alcohol-related injuries.
- No statutory dram shop cause of action exists in Virginia.
- No common law dram shop cause of action is recognized.
- No social host liability — hosts are not liable for injuries caused by intoxicated guests, even minors.
- Virginia Code § 4.1-304 makes it a criminal offense to sell alcohol to an intoxicated person, but this statute does NOT create a private civil cause of action.

Practitioners should seriously evaluate whether any viable claim exists before filing. The alternative theories below face enormous legal hurdles and may be summarily dismissed.

CAPTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF [____________________] COUNTY [/ CITY OF ____________________]
VIRGINIA

PARTIES

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] is an individual residing at [ADDRESS], [CITY], Virginia [ZIP CODE].

2. Defendant [ESTABLISHMENT NAME] ("Vendor Defendant") is a [corporation/LLC/individual/partnership] operating at [ADDRESS], [CITY], Virginia [ZIP CODE].

3. Defendant [INTOXICATED PERSON NAME] ("Intoxicated Defendant") is an individual residing at [ADDRESS], [CITY], Virginia [ZIP CODE].

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Va. Code § 17.1-513.

5. Venue is proper in [____________________] pursuant to Va. Code § 8.01-262 because [the cause of action arose in this jurisdiction / a Defendant resides in this jurisdiction].

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

6. At all relevant times, the Vendor Defendant operated [ESTABLISHMENT NAME] at [ADDRESS], [CITY], Virginia, and was engaged in the sale and service of alcoholic beverages.

7. On or about [DATE], the Intoxicated Defendant was present at the Vendor Defendant's premises.

8. The Vendor Defendant served alcoholic beverages to the Intoxicated Defendant.

9. At the time of service, the Intoxicated Defendant was visibly intoxicated.

10. On or about [DATE], at approximately [TIME], the Intoxicated Defendant [describe injurious conduct].

11. Plaintiff suffered personal injuries and damages.

COUNT I — DIRECT NEGLIGENCE

(Limited Alternative Theory)

12. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs.

13. The Vendor Defendant owed a duty of care to the Plaintiff based upon [specify the specific duty — NOT based on service of alcohol]:
    a. ☐ Duty as premises owner to maintain safe conditions for invitees;
    b. ☐ Duty arising from affirmative conduct that created or increased a foreseeable risk of harm;
    c. ☐ Duty to provide adequate security on the premises;
    d. ☐ Other: [________________________________]

14. The Vendor Defendant breached this duty by [specify breach — must be independent of mere alcohol service]:
    [________________________________]

15. The Vendor Defendant's breach was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

DAMAGES

16. As a result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiff has suffered:

a. Past and future medical expenses in the amount of $[____________];
b. Past and future lost wages in the amount of $[____________];
c. Pain and suffering;
d. Property damage in the amount of $[____________];
e. Such other damages as may be proven at trial.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against the Defendants:

a. Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
b. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest;
c. Costs of suit;
d. Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

SUBMITTED BY:

[________________________________]
[ATTORNEY NAME], VSB No. [____________]
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[CITY], Virginia [ZIP CODE]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]
Counsel for Plaintiff

STATE-SPECIFIC NOTES

Virginia — NO Dram Shop Liability

VIRGINIA DOES NOT RECOGNIZE DRAM SHOP LIABILITY — STATUTORY OR COMMON LAW.

The Rule: Virginia follows the traditional common law principle that the act of serving alcohol is too remote to constitute the proximate cause of injuries inflicted by an intoxicated person. The consumption, not the furnishing, is the legal cause.

Criminal But Not Civil: Va. Code § 4.1-304 makes it a criminal misdemeanor to sell alcohol to a person who is intoxicated. However, this criminal statute does NOT create a private civil cause of action for third-party injuries.

No Social Host Liability: Virginia does not recognize social host liability. Hosts are not civilly liable for injuries caused by intoxicated guests — even when alcohol was served to minors.

Very Limited Alternatives:
1. Premises Liability: If the injury occurred ON the establishment's premises, standard premises liability theories may apply (duty to invitees, negligent security).
2. Affirmative Conduct: If the establishment engaged in conduct beyond mere service that directly created or increased the risk (e.g., placing an unconscious patron in a car), a narrow negligence claim might survive — though case law supporting this is minimal.
3. Direct Claim Against the Intoxicated Person: The primary avenue for recovery is a direct negligence or intentional tort claim against the intoxicated individual.

Contributory Negligence: Virginia is one of the few remaining pure contributory negligence jurisdictions. Any fault on the part of the plaintiff completely bars recovery.

Statute of Limitations: Two years for personal injury under Va. Code § 8.01-243.

Key Case Law:
- Williamson v. Old Brogue, Inc., 232 Va. 350 (1986) — Rejected dram shop liability in Virginia.
- Robinson v. Matt Mary Moran, Inc., 259 Va. 412 (2000) — Reaffirmed no third-party liability for serving alcohol.

Practical Considerations:
- Dram shop claims in Virginia will almost certainly be dismissed.
- Counsel should focus on direct claims against the intoxicated tortfeasor.
- If the incident occurred on premises, explore premises liability theories independent of alcohol service.

This template is provided for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Virginia does not recognize dram shop liability. Always consult with a licensed Virginia attorney to evaluate alternative theories before filing any claim.