HAWTHORNE, California – Ever wonder when a restaurant can refuse to serve someone? In a recent incident at a local coffee shop, a customer became disruptive and was eventually asked to leave by the manager. The question arises: what are the circumstances under which an establishment can refuse service?
Under both federal and state law, it is illegal to discriminate against someone based on race, color, religion, citizenship, disability, sex or gender identification, sexual orientation, marital status, or medical or genetic information. Therefore, a restaurant must have a legitimate reason for refusing to serve someone. If a person is breaking rules, acting irrationally, or being disruptive, the establishment has the right to refuse service. However, it is essential for the business to ensure that its conduct is consistent and fair.
For example, if a restaurant has a dress code, it would be against the law to ask only Black individuals to leave for wearing tank tops while allowing White individuals to stay. On the other hand, if a person with a disability becomes loud and unruly due to excessive drinking, refusing service may be justified. The key factor is the specific reason for refusing service and the accompanying behavior that led to it.
It is important for businesses to handle such situations professionally and calmly. It is advisable to inform the individual that they will be refused service and asked to leave, preferably in the presence of witnesses. Documentation of the incident is also recommended. In more volatile situations, involving the police can be a prudent course of action.
Moving on, let’s explore the extent of liability a restaurant holds if a fight breaks out and an innocent party gets hurt. As a customer, you have a reasonable expectation of safety when visiting a restaurant open to the public. The owner has a duty to create a safe environment, including things like maintaining a slip-free floor.
In certain circumstances, the owner of a restaurant can be held liable for the criminal behavior of a third person. Referred to as “negligent security,” this occurs when the owner fails to take reasonable care in protecting customers from criminal conduct that could have been anticipated. Factors such as the presence of working locks, security cameras, screening measures, and adequate lighting come into play in determining liability.
It is crucial to carefully assess the facts of each case and ensure that the property owner takes appropriate actions within the boundaries of the law. Each situation requires a thorough understanding of the specific incident and a compliance with legal standards.
In summary, restaurants have the right to refuse service under certain circumstances. However, it is essential for businesses to avoid discriminatory practices and handle these situations professionally. Additionally, restaurant owners have a duty to provide a safe environment for their customers and can potentially be held liable for criminal conduct on their premises. Taking reasonable precautions and adhering to legal responsibilities is key in both situations.
(Ron Sokol is a practicing attorney with over 40 years of experience, and has served as a judge pro tem, mediator, and arbitrator multiple times. His insights are based on a summary of the law and are not intended to replace legal advice from qualified professionals.)
(Note: The information provided in this article is not legal advice and should not be considered as such. It is based on general situations and circumstances and may not apply to specific cases. Consultation with a qualified legal professional is recommended for individual concerns.)