Published on:



A parishioner who hosted a party and the Parish Church where the party was held was summoned by a party guest who was hurt after he was attacked by an underage guests intoxicated with alcohol and marijuana, a controlled substance. A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said hough the Church, as owner of the premises where the injured plaintiff was attacked, owed him a duty to keep its premises free of known dangerous conditions, which may include intoxicated guests, the Church did not host the party at which such drinking took place, but merely permitted a 20-year-old parishioner, to use its hall in exchange for a donation. Under the circumstances, the Church was not under a duty to supervise the said party or otherwise retain control of its premises. Nor can the Diocese, the hostess’ parents, who were present at the party, or another guest who allegedly was one of the few, if not the only adult at the party after the hostess’ parents left, be held liable on a common-law theory of failure to supervise intoxicated underage persons, since they were not the owners of the premises, and do not fall under any of the recognized exceptions to the common-law rule that a defendant generally has no duty to control the conduct of third persons so as to prevent them from harming others. The claims against the adult guests for negligent provision of alcohol should have been dismissed since no such cause of action exists at common law.

A New York Drug Possession Lawyer said that with regard to the plaintiffs’ statutory claims, the adults present at the party’s motions to dismiss the claims based on General Obligations Law should have been granted since it is undisputed that the guests were not charged for the beer served at the party. The said law states that any person who shall be injured in person, property, means of support or otherwise, by reason of the intoxication or impairment of ability of any person under the age of twenty-one years, whether resulting in his death or not, shall have a right of action to recover actual damages against any person who knowingly causes such intoxication or impairment of ability by unlawfully furnishing to or unlawfully assisting in procuring alcoholic beverages for such person with knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that such person was under the age of twenty-one years .

The claim based on General Obligations Law was properly dismissed since it did not sell alcohol to the persons who assaulted the plaintiff. As against the Church, the claim would not be viable even if it knew that there would be beer at the party, and was properly dismissed upon a record establishing that the Church did not play an indispensable role in making the beer available to the underage persons on its premises. Similarly, the claim was properly dismissed as against the Diocese, whose alleged liability appears to be wholly derivative of the Church’s, and as against the hostess’ parents upon a record establishing they were passive participants who merely knew of the underage drinking and did nothing else to encourage it. However, the claim was properly sustained as against the party hostess since she both procured and furnished the beer and as against the adult guest in view of the conflicting deposition testimony as to whether he assisted in procuring the beer. A Nassau Drug Possession Lawyer said that the claim against him based on General Obligations Law should have been dismissed because alcohol is not a controlled substance, and there is no evidence that he sold or assisted in procuring the marijuana consumed by the defendant who confessed to the criminal assault.

Because the plaintiffs proffered no admissible evidence to controvert the sworn testimony that he alone attacked the injured plaintiff, the court properly granted the motion to dismiss. The plaintiff, given his inability, due to the injuries sustained, to recall the incident, is entitled to a lessened burden of proof.

Joyful events may turn into lawsuit because of irresponsible people. If you are caught in this kind of stressful circumstances just make a call to a Queens Drug Possession Lawyer at Stephen Bilkis and Associates. Our great team of lawyers will see to it that whoever is responsible will be apprehended by the law.

Posted in:
Published on:

Comments are closed.

Contact Information