Couple Going On Trial For Providing Alcohol to a Minor Leading to Death
A couple is going to trial for providing alcohol to a minor, who died in a drunk driving accident in North Carolina. Charles and Kimberly Matthews were hosting a wedding reception at their house. Johnathan Taylor(18) attended, got drunk, drove into a tree at 89 mph and died. His blood-alcohol content was .20 nearly two and a half times the legal limit in North Carolina.
The Matthews are charged with aiding and abetting the consumption of alcohol by minors. Johnathan's parents are also suing the Wake County ABC Board and two other companies that either supplied or served alcohol to underage people at the reception. The Taylors are seeking $25,000 from each party for expenses and loss of consortium and companionship.
The Matthew's son, Thomas(19), plead guilty to buying alcohol. He has been charged with a misdemeanor for the underage purchase of alcohol. Thomas bought a bottle of whiskey without being carded.
Prosecutors said that Thomas, Johnathan, and several other teens began drinking before the reception, and continued to drink during the reception. One of the teens passed out during the reception and EMS had to be called. Thomas Matthews will be sentenced at the end of the trial, and he faces up to 120 days in prison.
On court on Monday, a parent said that he found out that his son had been drinking on the Matthew's property before this incident happened. He said that the couple did not take the matter seriously. The judge ruled that his testimony will not be a part of the trial.
The trial began on Monday, and it is estimated to be finished at the end of the week.
 |
| Photo Source: Court Chatter |
The Matthew's son, Thomas(19), plead guilty to buying alcohol. He has been charged with a misdemeanor for the underage purchase of alcohol. Thomas bought a bottle of whiskey without being carded.
Prosecutors said that Thomas, Johnathan, and several other teens began drinking before the reception, and continued to drink during the reception. One of the teens passed out during the reception and EMS had to be called. Thomas Matthews will be sentenced at the end of the trial, and he faces up to 120 days in prison.
On court on Monday, a parent said that he found out that his son had been drinking on the Matthew's property before this incident happened. He said that the couple did not take the matter seriously. The judge ruled that his testimony will not be a part of the trial.
The trial began on Monday, and it is estimated to be finished at the end of the week.
Comments from Allen:
I find this case very interesting for many reasons: A civil suit has been filed, but not against Dr. and Mrs. Matthews. Dr. and Mrs. Matthews are being charged criminal concerning the death of Jonathan Taylor, but they are not being charged with manslaughter. Additionally, North Carolina applies the doctrine of "contributory negligence," under which a lawsuit by the family of one killed in a drunk driving accident should not be able to recover for the drunk driver's death, because his consumption of alcohol directly contributed to his death.
The question was also raised, "Why does the suit only seek $25,000 for the death of this young man?
What gives?
Criminal prosecution: The prosecutor chose to charge the Matthewses with the crime he believes he has the greatest chance of proving: that they intentionally aided and abetted caterers in serving alcohol to minors. The couple did not actually serve the alcohol, but they owned the property on which it was served, they hired the caterers, and they were in control of whether the persons serving checked the identification of the persons to whom they were serving alcohol. Aiding and abetting the servers was an appropriate charge.
Civil suit against the companies serving alcohol: There is a "dramshop" law in North Carolina which states, if you serve alcohol to someone under 21, and that person gets injured driving an automobile while intoxicated, you are subject to liability for causing that person's injuries (and in this case, his death). Normally there could be no recovery by someone suing for the death of a drunk driver in North Carolina because North Carolina applies the doctrine of contributory negligence in personal injury actions: if you are partially at fault for causing the accident which injured you, you recover nothing. However, in North Carolina, this is a doctrine of "common law," a principle applied by courts which has evolved in the courts over several hundred years; it did not become law by the North Carolina legislature's passage of a law. The North Carolina dramshop law trumps the common law, and specifically allows the suit in this specific instance, and the doctrine of contributory law cannot apply in this case.
Why only $25,000? North Carolina divides its trial courts into a district court (which in Idaho would be the "magistrate court"), which has jurisdiction up to $25,000, and a superior court (which in Idaho would be the "district court"), which has jurisdiction of cases over $25,000. So in cases in which you are going to be asking a jury to award a large sum of money, you must put in your complaint that you are seeking "in excess of $25,000," which the plaintiffs did in this case, or the court clerk that directs your case to one court or the other will send you to the lower court and you will be limited to collecting a maximum of $25,000.
Why were the Matthewses not sued by Jonathan Taylor's parents? That suit may be coming later. There is a two year statute of limitations for filing wrongful death cases in North Carolina, so the suit against this couple may come after the criminal prosecution establishes that the Matthewses did aid and abet in the service of alcohol to Jonathan. When there is a criminal prosecution, plaintiffs' attorneys prefer to let the prosecutor press the criminal charge first; if the state wins, that conviction will be an established fact in the civil lawsuit, and it will save some time and expense for the plaintiff's lawyer.
However, here is a legal issue as yet unresolved for the Taylor family, should they desire to sue Dr. and Mrs. Matthews: they did not name Dr. and Mrs. Matthew in the dramshop lawsuit, and that cause of action must be filed within one year of the death of Jonathan; the Matthewses cannot be added to the existing dramshop lawsuit because the statute has run. If they file a suit against them under any theory of liabilty other than dramshop, the doctrine of contributory negligence will probably bar them from any recovery.
This tells me the Taylor family has probably made a decision to sue the companies serving the alcohol only, and that there will be no suit against Dr. and Mrs. Matthews.
Allen is able to provide his services if the incident takes place in the following Idaho Areas: American Falls, Arco, Blackfoot, Burley, Driggs, Idaho Falls, Malad City, Pocatello, Rexburg, Rigby, Salmon, St. Anthony, Twin Falls, Bannock County, Bingham County, Bonneville County, Butte County, Cassia County, Clark County, Fremont County, Jefferson County, Lemhi County, Madison County, Oneida County, Power County, Teton County, and Twin Falls County.
Sources for more information:
http://www.courtchatter.com/#!Son-of-Raleigh-couple-charged-in-deadly-crash-bought-Jack-Daniel’s-that-day/c1oiw/55b6eaef0cf2d0bb156b6dde
http://www.courtchatter.com/#!Lawsuit-Filed-Over-Teens-Death-In-Raleigh-Crash/c1oiw/55b6e7a50cf2d0bb156b6b98
http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_a9490560a3ec4be7af2f4924c2a24781.pdf
I find this case very interesting for many reasons: A civil suit has been filed, but not against Dr. and Mrs. Matthews. Dr. and Mrs. Matthews are being charged criminal concerning the death of Jonathan Taylor, but they are not being charged with manslaughter. Additionally, North Carolina applies the doctrine of "contributory negligence," under which a lawsuit by the family of one killed in a drunk driving accident should not be able to recover for the drunk driver's death, because his consumption of alcohol directly contributed to his death.
The question was also raised, "Why does the suit only seek $25,000 for the death of this young man?
What gives?
Criminal prosecution: The prosecutor chose to charge the Matthewses with the crime he believes he has the greatest chance of proving: that they intentionally aided and abetted caterers in serving alcohol to minors. The couple did not actually serve the alcohol, but they owned the property on which it was served, they hired the caterers, and they were in control of whether the persons serving checked the identification of the persons to whom they were serving alcohol. Aiding and abetting the servers was an appropriate charge.
Civil suit against the companies serving alcohol: There is a "dramshop" law in North Carolina which states, if you serve alcohol to someone under 21, and that person gets injured driving an automobile while intoxicated, you are subject to liability for causing that person's injuries (and in this case, his death). Normally there could be no recovery by someone suing for the death of a drunk driver in North Carolina because North Carolina applies the doctrine of contributory negligence in personal injury actions: if you are partially at fault for causing the accident which injured you, you recover nothing. However, in North Carolina, this is a doctrine of "common law," a principle applied by courts which has evolved in the courts over several hundred years; it did not become law by the North Carolina legislature's passage of a law. The North Carolina dramshop law trumps the common law, and specifically allows the suit in this specific instance, and the doctrine of contributory law cannot apply in this case.
Why only $25,000? North Carolina divides its trial courts into a district court (which in Idaho would be the "magistrate court"), which has jurisdiction up to $25,000, and a superior court (which in Idaho would be the "district court"), which has jurisdiction of cases over $25,000. So in cases in which you are going to be asking a jury to award a large sum of money, you must put in your complaint that you are seeking "in excess of $25,000," which the plaintiffs did in this case, or the court clerk that directs your case to one court or the other will send you to the lower court and you will be limited to collecting a maximum of $25,000.
Why were the Matthewses not sued by Jonathan Taylor's parents? That suit may be coming later. There is a two year statute of limitations for filing wrongful death cases in North Carolina, so the suit against this couple may come after the criminal prosecution establishes that the Matthewses did aid and abet in the service of alcohol to Jonathan. When there is a criminal prosecution, plaintiffs' attorneys prefer to let the prosecutor press the criminal charge first; if the state wins, that conviction will be an established fact in the civil lawsuit, and it will save some time and expense for the plaintiff's lawyer.
However, here is a legal issue as yet unresolved for the Taylor family, should they desire to sue Dr. and Mrs. Matthews: they did not name Dr. and Mrs. Matthew in the dramshop lawsuit, and that cause of action must be filed within one year of the death of Jonathan; the Matthewses cannot be added to the existing dramshop lawsuit because the statute has run. If they file a suit against them under any theory of liabilty other than dramshop, the doctrine of contributory negligence will probably bar them from any recovery.
This tells me the Taylor family has probably made a decision to sue the companies serving the alcohol only, and that there will be no suit against Dr. and Mrs. Matthews.
***********************************************************************************************************************
Allen Browning is an attorney in Idaho Falls, Idaho who handles personal injury and criminal defense. He has over 30 years of experience and handled thousands of cases. Allen work with cases from all over Idaho. Call (208) 542-2700 to set up a free consultation if you are facing legal trouble or you have been involved in an accident.
Also, check out browninglaw.net for more information about Allen and Browning Law.
Allen Browning can help with all personal injury claims including motor vehicle accidents, serious and disabling accidents, and wrongful death claims.
Allen Browning is an Idaho Falls attorney who can also help with drunk driving (DUI) , Felony, Misdemeanor, Domestic Violence, Drug Crimes, Theft, Juvenile Crimes, Violent Crimes, and Probation/Parole Violations. He is one of the most experienced and successful criminal defense attorneys in Idaho.
Allen is able to provide his services if the incident takes place in the following Idaho Areas: American Falls, Arco, Blackfoot, Burley, Driggs, Idaho Falls, Malad City, Pocatello, Rexburg, Rigby, Salmon, St. Anthony, Twin Falls, Bannock County, Bingham County, Bonneville County, Butte County, Cassia County, Clark County, Fremont County, Jefferson County, Lemhi County, Madison County, Oneida County, Power County, Teton County, and Twin Falls County.
Sources for more information:
http://www.courtchatter.com/#!Son-of-Raleigh-couple-charged-in-deadly-crash-bought-Jack-Daniel’s-that-day/c1oiw/55b6eaef0cf2d0bb156b6dde
http://www.courtchatter.com/#!Lawsuit-Filed-Over-Teens-Death-In-Raleigh-Crash/c1oiw/55b6e7a50cf2d0bb156b6b98
http://media.wix.com/ugd/943520_a9490560a3ec4be7af2f4924c2a24781.pdf
Comments
Post a Comment