Court to Examine Social Host Liability for Underage Adults
"Prospectively ... we hold that an adult ... who is under the legal drinking age shall owe a common law duty to injured parties to desist from facilitating the drinking of alcohol by underage adults in his place of residence," said the court below in the case, which now heads to the Supreme Court.
October 18, 2019 at 09:28 AM
4 minute read
The New Jersey Supreme Court granted a petition for certification in a case involving civil claims against an adult teen who hosted a drinking party at his home for other adult teens, one of whom subsequently died in a fatal crash.
All of the teens involved were over 18 years old but below the legal drinking age of 21.
In Estate of Narleski v. Gomes, defendant Amboy Food Liquor and News Inc., sold three 24 oz. cans of beer and a half-gallon of vodka to 19-year-old Brandon Tyler Narleski without checking his ID on Nov. 9, 2014, according to court documents.
Narleski later that night went to his friend Mark Zwierzynski's home. They partied and drank in Zwierzynski's bedroom, and Narleski left afterward as a passenger in the car of one of his inebriated friends, Nicholas Gomes. He died when Gomes lost control of his vehicle, crashed into a center median and flipped the car over. Narleski, who wasn't wearing a seat belt at the time, was ejected from the vehicle and pronounced dead at the scene, documents said.
After Narleski's death, his estate sued and settled with Gomes, and the vehicle's owners, Orquivanes and Sergio Gomes, and Amboy Food under the Dram Shop Act.
Amboy Food in turn sued Zwierzynski in a third-party complaint, contending that Zwierzynski and his parents, Mercedes Apraez and Zdzislaw Zwierzynski, had a duty not to allow underage drinking in the home.
Zwierzynski and his parents moved for summary judgment, because, they said, they owed no such duty.
A judge granted their summary judgment motion on March 29, 2018, concluding that they did not have a legal duty to supervise the guests—who were under the drinking age but still were adults.
On appeal, Amboy Food argued that the court should recognize a legal duty of the owners or occupants of a home to prevent underage individuals from consuming alcohol there. It asserted that Zwierzynski and his parents respectively engaged in negligent conduct that supports civil liability.
In affirming summary judgment to the third-party defendants, the appellate court agreed with the trial court that the parents owed no statutory or common law duty to prevent their adult son from allowing his underage friends to consume alcohol in his room without the parents' knowledge or consent.
The court did recognize a legal duty for defendants in Mark Zwierzynski's situation. Though the panel didn't apply that duty retroactively to him, it wrote: "Prospectively, however, we hold that an adult such as Mark Zwierzynski who is under the legal drinking age shall owe a common law duty to injured parties to desist from facilitating the drinking of alcohol by underage adults in his place of residence, regardless of whether he owns, rents, or manages the premises.
"Such a rule of law is a logical extension of Thomas and Morella, and is consistent with the policy objectives of related statutes," wrote Appellate Division Judge Jack Sabatino in the June 6, 2019, opinion.
"We need not resolve here whether a claim for contribution or indemnity by a Dram Shop defendant against an underage social host seeking to diminish its liability would be viable or instead contrary to public policy. We recognize that the common law rule of liability we have endorsed goes beyond the scope of the disorderly persons statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:33-17," Sabatino said. "For these reasons, the trial court's summary judgment dismissal of Amboy's third-party complaint is affirmed."
The court deferred the effective date of its prospective holding for 180 days "to enable possible further judicial review or responsive legislation."
Further judicial review is to come, as the Supreme Court granted certification in an Oct. 10 order.
Mark Robert Scirocco of the Law Offices of Robert A. Scirocco in Mount Olive represents Amboy Food. Scirocco was not available to comment on the certification order.
Russell Macnow in Colts Neck represents Zwierzynski, the host teen, and his parents. Macnow also was not available to comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSocial Media Policy for Judges Provides Guidance in a Changing World
3 minute readBank of America's Cash Sweep Program Attracts New Legal Fire in Class Action
3 minute read'Something Really Bad Happened': J&J's Talc Bankruptcy Vote Under Attack
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How Legal Aid and Tech Collaboration Can Bridge the Justice Gap
- 2The Rise of AI-Generated Deepfakes: A New Cybersecurity Threat for Law Firms
- 3Litigation Leaders: Labaton’s Eric Belfi on Running Case Investigation, Analysis and Evaluation In-House
- 4Spoliation Sanctions
- 5At FDA, Flavored Vape Products Go Up In Smoke
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250