Not long ago the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled to allow individuals convicted of As New Jersey drunken driving defense attorneys, we have represented hundreds of drivers through the years who have been accused of drinking and driving. Knowing that the penalties following a DWI conviction can be quite stiff, it's understandable that these individuals would use every avenue at their disposal to avoid having a drunk driving verdict placed on their record. And, as a former municipal prosecutor who handled numerous prescription drug- (drug DUI) and alcohol-related (DWI) cases, I know that a percentage of those accused do not deserve to be convicted of impaired driving. When it comes to injury-related DWI cases, the state's supreme court had granted injured motorists the right to sue a restaurant for damages related to any injuries sustained in a drunk driving accident that could be tied to the selling of alcohol to that individual.
However, recent legislation submitted by Assemlyman John Amodeo (Atlantic County) is intended to reverse the Court's decision and prohibit convicted drunk drivers from suing restaurants for injuries they sustained while driving drunk. In fact, according to news outlets, the New Jersey Lawsuit Reform Alliance (NJLRA) was against the Supreme Court's decision from the start.
In its previous decision, the Court stated that individuals are deterred from driving while drunk because they lose the right to sue under Title 39 for insurance coverage for their injuries. However, on the flip side, allowing a person who has been injured in a drunken driving accident to file a suit against a liquor establishment for serving a "visibly intoxicated" patron has a similar effect that advances the state's goal of deterring drunk driving.
The court continued by saying that allowing "the latter form of action to proceed, rather than barring it by N.J.S.A. 39:6A-4.5(b), the application of established principles of comparative negligence will apportion properly the responsibility for damages as between dram shop parties and the injured driver."
This ruling by the Court apparently raised the hackles of some around the state, including the NJLRA, whose executive director, Marcus Rayner, stated, "Common sense is being downgraded." He added that the Court's ruling allows drunk drivers to essentially "relinquish personal responsibility," then collect monetary damages from the establishment that served he or she the alcohol.
This all precipitated from a 2006 DWI case in which a motorcycle rider hit a passenger car and in the process injured himself. The plaintiff's blood-alcohol content (BAC) was more than twice the legal limit of 0.08 percent. Although the biker pleaded guilty to drunken driving, he later filed a lawsuit against the Toms River restaurant that served him the alcohol. The suit was predicated on New Jersey's Dram Shop Act.
Bill would overturn N.J. SC's drunk-driving decision, LegalNewsline.com, July 1, 2011
