Tempe Bar Closes After Being Tied To Second Deadly DUI Crash

Most adults are aware that it is illegal to drink and drive because of the dangers it poses to others. But fewer are aware that a bar can also be held responsible for damages incurred in a DUI crash. So if a bar is associated with a serious accident, it could mean the end of a business. That’s just what happened to Tempe Tavern, an East Valley bar in business for 15 years. In September 2026, 21-year-old Zachary Penrod drank at Tempe Tavern before driving. He crashed into a family who was pulled over on the US-60 changing a tire, killing their 82-year-old grandmother. This led to a criminal investigation, which wasn’t Tempe Tavern’s first. The bar was tied to another fatal DUI crash last year, and has been raided twice for underage drinking in the past 2 years. The owners call the allegations against them harassment, and are suing the city for civil rights violations. The bar closed due to the legal drama and impending lawsuits, planning to add those damages to its civil rights lawsuit. Many people don’t realize that a bar can actually be held liable for serving a customer who drove drunk and crashed their vehicle. Read on for more information on this topic. If you’ve been injured in this type of accident, call our law firm today at 480-833-8000. 

Arizona Revised Statutes Section 4-311

A.R.S. § 4-311 is Arizona’s law on liability for serving minors and intoxicated persons. This statute opens up liability for property damage, personal injury, and wrongful death claims for a bar that overserves a patron or serves liquor to a minor. There are three requirements to pursuing a claim under Section 4-311:

1. The bar sold liquor to someone who was obviously intoxicated, or the bar served liquor to a minor without checking their ID or with the knowledge that they were underage;
2. The purchaser then consumed that liquor; and 
3. The liquor consumed was a proximate cause of the property damage, bodily injury, or death. 

Pursuing a bar in an accident claim is simpler when the driver was underage, especially if the driver wasn’t properly ID’ed. Section 4-311 creates a presumption that if requirements 1 and 3 are met, then requirement 2 is met. It is up to the bar owner to rebut that presumption with evidence. But whether a person is “obviously intoxicated” is a less clear-cut issue. Section 4-311 defines obvious intoxication as the person being “inebriated to the extent that a person’s physical faculties are substantially impaired and the impairment is shown by significantly uncoordinated physical action or physical dysfunction that would have been obvious to a reasonable person.” 

There are several different physical signs that a person may be under the influence of alcohol. Someone who is drunk may have red, bloodshot, or watery eyes and have trouble focusing. Their skin may be flushed and red, or they could be clammy and sweaty. They may smell like alcohol, or another strong chemical odor used to cover the scent of alcohol. Alcohol can cause balance problems, so they may be swaying, stumbling, or tripping and falling over. They could be clumsier, dropping and spilling things. Speech may be incoherent, slurred, or unreasonably loud. Alcohol can cause nausea, so someone puking could be another sign that they are under the influence. If a bar has security cameras, footage can show whether or not these types of visible symptoms of intoxication were present. There may also be photos and social media posts from the person in question or other patrons in the bar. A skilled personal injury attorney can help a plaintiff find the clearest and most convincing evidence to help them secure a fair award. 

Assigning Liability through Comparative Negligence

Some states assign liability in accident claims using contributory negligence, but Arizona follows the doctrine of comparative negligence. This doctrine allows multiple parties, including the plaintiff, to be found partially liable for the accident and the ensuing injuries. This doctrine would likely apply when pursuing a bar for injuries incurred in a DUI crash, as the driver is ultimately the primary responsible party. An example of comparative negligence in such a situation would be as follows:

• The drunk driver is 85% responsible for the damages
• The bar is responsible for 15% for the damages

Another factor could be relevant to the claim, like weather or poor road conditions. The driver could even be partially at fault for the accident leading to their own injuries. A comparative negligence analysis here might look like the following:

• The drunk driver is 80% responsible for the damages
• The bar is 15% responsible for the damages 
• Poor road conditions or the plaintiff speeding are 5% responsible for the damages

The bar could even be held a greater percentage liable for the accident if their conduct was particularly egregious, like holding an all-you-can-drink event without cutting people off or bartenders pressuring patrons to drink despite hesitation due to needing to drive. Arizona’s comparative negligence rule doesn’t require any party to be a certain amount at fault for their claim to be disqualified. A plaintiff can theoretically be 99% at fault for an accident and still pursue a claim. But their award will be reduced to the extent that they were at fault for causing the accident. So take the example above where the plaintiff is 5% responsible for speeding- if the total damages are $100,000, the total amount they could collect would be reduced by 5%, or $5,000. The drunk driver would owe $80,000, and the bar that overserved the driver would be on the hook for $15,000. 

It’s clear to see how comparative negligence can become highly relevant if a bar has been accused of liability in a DUI crash for overserving a patron or serving alcohol to a minor. When a few percentage points translate to thousands of dollars, the damages add up quickly. And assigning liability and actually collecting damages are two different issues. A drunk driver could be uninsured or underinsured, making it the plaintiff’s responsibility to pursue any unpaid amount. A bar may have business insurance which fully covers the damages more than a state minimum auto insurance policy would. 

Pursue a Multi-Party DUI Accident Claim with our Arizona Personal Injury Team

When someone decides to get behind the wheel of a car after drinking, it puts lives in danger. Rates of death and serious bodily injury increase when alcohol is a factor in a traffic collision. That means that damages are more higher as well, especially if the accident results in disfigurement, disability, or death. And both auto and business insurance companies will fight harder to avoid paying out such high-value claims. This is why it’s all the more important to have a reputable personal injury firm fighting for your legal rights in a multi-party DUI accident claim. Our firm makes starting the process easy with a free initial case evaluation by phone. If you wish to hire our firm, you don’t pay until we win your case, with our competitive contingency fee guarantee. Schedule your free consultation with one of our dedicated Arizona accident attorneys today by calling 480-833-8000.