NJ Supreme Court rules against fatal DWI accident victim’s case…
May 12th, 2009 | By Michael L. Saile, Jr., Esq. | Category: Blogs, New Jersey Injury InformationIn this case, the New Jersey Supreme Court was asked to rule under the NJ Licensed Alcoholic Beverage Server Fair Liability Act, also known as the NJ Dram Shop Law, as to whether a bar who served alcohol to one patron can be held liable for a fatal car accident, caused by another patron who was at the bar, but not drinking.
The case involved two men who arrived at the C View Inn in Cape May, New Jersey. One man was a minor and was not served any alcohol, but appeared to the witnesses as very intoxicated. The other man who was over 21 years old was served alcohol on the premises. After the two men left the bar, the man who was a minor drove home. On their ride home the driver hit a guardrail and killed his passenger.
The mother of the passenger brought a wrongful death case against the driver and other unknown defendants. The trial court dismissed the case. The NJ Appellate Division reversed and held that the bar had a duty to monitor the patron who was not drinking (the driver) and also the other man since they were both visibly intoxicated.
The NJ Supreme Court reversed and stated that given the facts of the case permitting a negligent supervision claim would thwart the intention of the NJ Dram Shop Act.
The Court did say that it is not ruling on whether a licensed alcoholic beverage server who does not serve a patron would or would not have a duty to act under the law.
i think you have mentioned this law in other blog articles. i think what they high court is saying is that because the driver was not served any alcohol at the bar, that the bar is not responsible.
what is not clear is if the driver was dui, and if in fact he was, where did he get the alcohol, ….. the driver should probably come clean and tell all, ie- the person who died bought it for him,…….or whatever the case may be, ….
another point is, 2 guys walk into a bar, …. it is not like that have to sign in and say who is driving, or if they even have car, …..
maybe they walked there.
the purpose of the law is to help make sure people dont over drink at bars, it doesnt matter if they have car or not
right?
young drivers are sometime bad drivers,….. but as this case was dismissed against the driver, for wrongful dseath, obviously the nj supreme court not only felt the driver was not dui, but that the one car accident was not his fault.
he must have hit that guard rail pretty hard to kill his passenger though.
i think something is missing, …. is this kid connectED politically in some way, that forced the nj supreme court to rule in his favor, …. even if he was, it is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THAT WAY.
I WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION ON THIS CASE.
CLEARLY, EVEN IF THE KID WAS STRONE COLD SOBER, AND ACCIDENTLY RAN HIS CAR AT HIGH SPEED INTO A HIGHWAY DIVIDER, THE WRONGFUL DEATH SUIT SHOULD BE WON BY THE VICTIMS FAMILY, ….
IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE TO ME.
Yeah I think there is something we don’t know about the driver. If he was under the influence how much? If he perfectly coherent at the bar and not drinking there is some shady gray area there because he could have drank more when he left.
yeah but a person died in his car as a direct result froma coliosion into a concrete wall caused by the driver,.. why would intoxication matter on wrongful death? The wrongful death suit still should have stood, … thats th epart i guess I am not understanding, how the case for wrongful death was lost by the plaintiffs family