Liability in alcohol-related accidents
By Kenneth Gorman,
Lombardo and Gilles
With the holidays approaching, many people are planning on
hosting parties where alcohol is served. If someone drinks too much
alcohol at a party and either hurts themselves or someone else as a
result, can the person hosting the party be sued? The short answer
is that, for most social events, a host cannot be successfully sued
for serving alcohol to an adult, no matter how much alcohol was
served.
Liability in alcohol-related accidents
By Kenneth Gorman,
Lombardo and Gilles
With the holidays approaching, many people are planning on hosting parties where alcohol is served. If someone drinks too much alcohol at a party and either hurts themselves or someone else as a result, can the person hosting the party be sued? The short answer is that, for most social events, a host cannot be successfully sued for serving alcohol to an adult, no matter how much alcohol was served.
In the late 1970s, the California Supreme Court ruled that it was permissible to find someone liable if they served alcohol to a person who subsequently injured someone else. In response, the Legislature quickly passed, and the governor signed, Civil Code §1714, called the “Social Host Immunity” laws. So there would be no doubt, the law states that it specifically overrules court cases that had allowed such liability. The Legislature reasoned that while drunk driving was a scourge, the prospect of suing every homeowner who had a friend over for a drink was far too onerous.
The statute is also unusual in expressly stating that people are responsible for their own actions. It holds that it is the consumption, not the provision, of alcohol that causes alcohol-related injuries. Therefore, private citizens who furnish alcohol cannot be liable for injuries sustained by someone they serve alcohol to, or someone who was hurt by someone they served alcohol to.
This general immunity from civil liability does not mean immunity from criminal statutes. It is still a misdemeanor for any person to serve alcohol to anyone under 21 (Business and Professions Code sec. 25658). This includes a parent who merely helps set up the keg at their minor child’s party, or requires the minors to replace any alcohol that they consume. In addition, if a parent allows someone in their home who is under 18 to consume alcohol, even if it is not their child, and that child subsequently drives a car with a blood alcohol level of above .005, the parent is guilty of a misdemeanor.
Social host immunity is not limited to parties. For example, this author once represented a condominium owner who was sued by a tenant who had fallen on the exterior stairway and seriously injured her ankle. She had rented for almost a year and had used the stairs hundreds of time without incident before this. One part of the defense was that hospital records showed that she had a high blood alcohol level, but she denied it. The friend she had been visiting for dinner before the incident testified at deposition that she couldn’t remember how much alcohol the plaintiff had to drink, but it was probably only a tiny amount. That contradicted the hospital records.
As trial drew near and the possibility of testifying in front of a judge or jury under penalty of perjury again became more apparent, the witness hired an attorney. It turns out she knew a law student in another state who told her that if she admitted serving alcohol at dinner she could be sued as well, so she testified misleadingly. Her California attorney correctly advised her that the law student’s advice was absolutely wrong and in fact had subjected her to a charge of perjury. She agreed to revise her testimony once she understood that she could not be held liable, and with this new testimony, the case quickly went away.
Another case demonstrated that “social host” immunity is not unlimited. In a tragic matter, three teenage boys were seriously injured and one killed as a result of drunk driving after purchasing two twelve packs of beer at a combination gas station and beverage store in Contra Costa County. The clerk did not require identification when they bought the beer. The boys drank most of the case before they left the parking lot. The driver lost control on a turn, flipped the car, two passengers were ejected (no seatbelts) and the driver died. The author represented one of the injured boys and named the store as a defendant. The store asserted the Social Host Immunity, but the trial judge agreed with us that the store was not a “social host.” As a result, the case settled. It is not clear if subsequent appellate court decisions command a different result, but it is clear that not everybody can qualify as a “social host.” Despite that, the hosts of routine activities like weddings, barbeques, birthdays and holiday parties can continue to serve alcohol without fear of civil liability as a result.
This column is the work product of Lombardo & Gilles, LLP, which has offices in Hollister and Salinas. Ken Gorman is an attorney with Lombardo & Gilles, LLP. You may contact the author at (888) 757-2444 or ke*@lo****.com. Mail your questions to Ken Gorman, It’s the Law, c/o The Pinnacle, 380 San Benito St., Hollister, CA 95023.
