Prom Season - Parents Beware

Another prom season is here.  For parents, as well as their children, proms and other school celebrations pose potentially significant legal problems both civilly and criminally.  The NJ Code of Criminal Justice section 2C:33-17(a) provides that "anyone who purposely or knowingly offers or serves or makes available an alcoholic beverage to a person under the legal age for consuming alcoholic beverages or entices or encourages that person to drink an alcoholic beverage is a disorderly person"  For those of you unaware, the legal drinking age in NJ is 21.  Disorderly persons offenses are punishable by up to 6 months in jail and/or a fine of $1,000.

The law is not limited to those over the age of 21.  For example, if your adult child is under age 21 and serves alcohol in your house to his/her friends under age 21, he /she can be convicted under the statute.  Additionally, another section of the same law makes it a disorderly person offense to permit your house or office to be used as a location where alcohol will be served or made available to underage drinkers.

In 2006, a NJ couple were convicted under this statute for hosting a prom party for their daughter, knowing that alcoholic beverages would be available to persons under 21.  Their defense that they preferred to have the kids drink at their house rather than outside fell on deaf ears.

Lastly, parents should be aware that they face potentially large civil liability to third parties as social hosts if they provide alcoholic beverages to a visibly intoxicated underage drinker who then causes injuries to others through the use of a motor vehicle.  In fact, recent court decisions have held that parents and other social hosts can be liable to the underage drinker himself for injuries he sustains in a motor vehicle accident caused by the intoxiaction.

The substance of this post is adapted from an article I wrote that was published in The Community News on February 28, 2007.

 

What is New Jersey's Tort Threshold?

In an attempt to control ever increasing automobile insurance premiums, the NJ Legislature has passed a series of so-called tort reform measures over the years.  The most recent, the Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act (AICRA) was passed in 1998.  Amongst many things, it enable purchasers of automobile insurance policies to choose either the Threshold or No Threshold option.

The Threshold option limits your right to sue for pain and suffering in exchange for a reduced premium. Consumers who choose the Threshold option agree that they and their spouses and children in the household will generally not be able to sue for pain and suffering arsing from a motor vehicle accident unless they suffer an injury in one of six categories: Death; Dismemberment: Loss of a fetus; Significant disfigurement or scarring; Displaced fractures; a permanent injury - defined as an injury that has not healed to function normally and will not heal to function normally with further medical treatment.

In most circumstances, if you do not suffer an injury in one of those categories, you will not be able to recover for you pain and suffering although you will generally receive PIP benefits to pay for your medical expenses and some loss of earnings.  Of particular note is the fracture category.  A simple fracture will not qualify UNLESS you can prove by competent medical evidence that the fracture produces a permanent injury, a relatively high bar for many simple fractures.

As with all things legal, there are exceptions to this rule.  For instance, if you involved in an accident with a commercial vehicle which is not required to carry PIP coverage, the threshold does not apply to you.