Under California's doctrine of respondeat superior, when a server makes an unlawful sale under §25602, the licensee/employer can be held:
Explanation
Respondeat superior makes an employer vicariously responsible for the wrongful acts of an employee performed within the scope of employment. In the RBS context, the licensee is administratively responsible to ABC for the conduct of its servers (license suspension/revocation under §24200), regardless of whether the licensee personally knew of the sale. Independent-contractor classifications (a) generally do not insulate ABC licensees from server misconduct.
Law Reference: Cal. Civ. Code §1714; respondeat superiorThis topic, taught in full in the California RBS (Responsible Beverage Service) guide. California RBS — Responsible Beverage Service Study Guide (2026) — PDF + EPUB, $9.99 · 14-day refund →
Practice all 100 questions free — no signup required.
Own the complete California RBS (Responsible Beverage Service) guide — PDF + EPUB, $9.99 →
Related questions on this topic
- Under Bus. & Prof. Code §25602, a server who sells alcohol to an obviously intoxicated person faces what level of criminal liability?
- Under California's general 'dram shop' rule in Bus. & Prof. Code §25602(b) and (c), can a server or licensee be held civilly liable to a third party (e.g., a victim of a drunk-driving crash) for serving alcohol to an obviously intoxicated adult?
- In Ennabe v. Manosa (2014), the California Supreme Court extended §25602.1 civil liability to whom?
- ABC may suspend or revoke an alcohol license under §24200 for multiple grounds. Which of the following is a common ground?
- The burden of proof for a criminal §25602 prosecution against a server is:
- If a server is criminally charged with a §25658 sale-to-minor violation but presents proof that they checked a bona fide §25660 ID in good faith, what is the legal effect?
Last reviewed: · editorial process