I mentioned the law i was refering to but guess a link would have been better. And again i get this doesn't apply here, I'm just saying if this occured elsewhere, her lawsuit wouldn't seem ridiculous and probably would succeed if she can prove she was intoxicated when served.

https://www.macelree.com/the-pennsylvania-dram-shop-law/#:~:text=The%20Liquor%20Code,person%20of%20known%20intemperate%20habi

The food example was just to show that laws are not followed but they are still laws. You can't serve a med rare or rare, don't even think med but can't remember the temps rn, steak legally where I live, as it is not cooked to a safe temp. It is still done tho just like bar serve intoxicated people and they cause injuries without consequences. That was all I was trying to do with that. Provide an example of something that's on the books but ignored.

Yeah, I'm stating it isn't odd or outrageous that they're being held responsible as they would be if this occurred where I live. People are acting like that's a weird or shocking idea when it seems pretty normal and just to me. And they do but just like restaurants that serve a steak not cooked to 155, they're opening themselves up to legal responsibility should something go wrong.

You're ignoring what the law states to say how you feel about the situation. If they're serving her responsibility and how the law states they should be, she wouldn't be getting drunk, at least not on their alcohol. I get that's not what actually happens irl and a bar that did that would be closed within a month or two but they're all leaving themselves open to some leagl liability should someone really want to go after them.

She shares most of the blame but potentially not all.

If she wasn't visably intoxicated, then why did they kick her out and cut her off? I agree with you, it'll be hard for her to prove they knowingly served her while intoxicated but by law, or at least in order to have a liquor license, staff must be trained to be able to spot someone intoxicated. I'm arguing just what the laws near me say, not what anyone thinks or what actually happens. Don't think I've ever heard of a bar or person being sued for this but they could be and I do agree with it. If you're serving alcohol, some of the responsibility lies with you in keeping people safe.

Doesn't matter if they stopped and kicked her out, if they served her while visable intoxicated they could be held responsible. Again that is in my state and Pennsylvania is kinda wacky when it comes to alcohol. If you wanna look it up it's PA's Dram Shop Law. Like I said in my last post, don't know the laws where this took place so this or something might not apply here.

I did, and they still can be found liable, I don't know how Canadian alcohol laws. Where I live, a bar or anyone that supplied an visable intoxicated individial can be held responsible for an accident should that drunk person cause/be in one. I don't think it happens often tho.

If they overserved her then yes they should be held liable. That's part of being able to sell alcohol. You must cut someone off if they had too much and must be able to recognize when a person needs to be cut off.