Library Assignment#1
Due Thursday, January 22

 Read through the five fact patterns below which raise issues concerning the liability of a social host. Using the principles of law from the McGuiggan case, try to figure out in each case what arguments the plaintiff would have made and what arguments the defendant would have made. Then try to figure out how the court would have decided the case.

FACT PATTERNS ON SOCIAL HOST LIABILITY

Based on what you have learned about the law in Massachusetts regarding the liability of a social host for injuries caused by the negligent driving of a drunken guest, consider the following fact patters. For each one, decide how you would argue the case if you were the plaintiff and how you would argue it if you were the defendant. Applying the principles of law from the McGuiggan, try to reach agreement in your group as to the outcome of the case.

1. Jeffrey and two of his friends, all under the age of 21 which was the legal drinking age at the time, started drinking in the early evening and Jeffrey's house. They drove to a nearby liquor store, paid $5 to a passerby to buy them a bottle of vodka, and then drove to another friend's house who was having a BYOB party. 40-50 people attended the party. The host of the party, Matthew, made space for his guests' beer in his refrigerator, as well as providing juice for mixing drinks, glasses, and ice. Jeffrey brought his own vodka into the kitchen and mixed himself a drink. Matthew did not serve Jeffrey any liquor. Matthew circulated throughout the house, beer in hand, socializing with guests. He did not tell anyone to stop drinking. He chatted with Jeffrey while Jeffrey was in the kitchen stirring a pitcher of vodka and pineapple juice. At the time, Jeffrey was unsteady on his feet and visibly drunk. Matthew did not say anything to Jeffrey about his condition. After staying at the party about 1 ½ hours, Jeffrey left in his car, crossed the center line going about 60 mph and struck a police officer on a motorcycle. As a result of the accident, the police officer suffered severe and permanent physical injuries. Is Matthew liable for the injuries to the police officer?

2. John and two friends, all 17 years of age, partied at John's house in the early evening when John's parents were not at home. One of John's friends brought 2 cases of beer from his car into John's house and put it on the kitchen counter. Four other friends came over and the group played drinking games for the next 2 hours while helping themselves to the beer in John's kitchen. After a while, four of the drinkers left; the others got into John's family's station wagon and brought the remaining beer along and went to another friend's house. Around midnight, Jordon, one of John's friends got a ride back to John's house to pick up his car. After retrieving his car, he crossed the center line of the road and collided with the on-coming vehicle. Jordon was intoxicated at the time. The driver of the on-coming car was killed. Is John liable for the injuries caused by Jordon?

3. Steve, age 24, had lived on and off with his uncle, Ronald. One evening, Steve went to Ronald's house, fixed himself something to eat and took a beer from the refrigerator. He went out to the garage to work on his car and helped himself to more beers from the refrigerator in the garage. There were also sodas stored in the garage refrigerator. Steve drank 5 or 6 bottles of beer. Ronald was also drinking with Steve, although he drank less. About 3 hours later, Steve and Ronald went to a neighborhood bar, Pete & Henry's. While they waited for their take-out orders, Ronald bought Steve 2 16-ounce cans of beer. Steve headed off to where he was living about 30 miles away. When he left, Ronald asked him if he was okay to drive. Steve knew when he left Pete & Henry's that he was "pretty well intoxicated." While he was driving, he crossed the center line and collided head-on with a vehicle going in the opposite direction, causing severe injuries. Was Ronald liable for the injuries caused by Steve? Was Pete&Henry's liable for the injuries caused by Steve?

4. Margaret gave her daughter, a high school student, permission to have a party at her house. She was not home when the party was taking place. Margaret never kept alcohol in her house, there was none on the premises when she left, and she did not permit her daughter to drink. She did not see anyone consuming alcohol before she left. One of the guests, Darren, brought beer to the party which he consumed. Although he did not appear drunk when he left the party, due to his intoxication he negligently drove his car into another car, causing injuries to the driver. Is Margaret liable for the injuries caused by Darren?

5. Audrey reluctantly allowed her 17 year old daughter to have a party at their house. She decided to stay there while the party was going on to chaperone. The party consisted of 3 girls and 4 boys. When the boys arrived, Audrey greeted them. They were carrying beer which they made no effort to hide. The party was in the downstairs den and Audrey remained upstairs. She went downstairs twice to check on things; everyone was drinking beer and made no effort to hide it. Later, some other boys came over and got into a fight with the boys who had been drinking at the party. They were armed with sticks and tire irons. One of the boys sustained serious injuries. Was Audrey liable for the injuries caused by her drunken guests?

After you have discussed the fact patterns in your groups, you will go to the library or use Lexis-Nexis to look up the cases that they come from. The citations for the case corresponding to the numbered fact patterns are:

1. Ulwick v. DeChristopher, 411 Mass. 401, 582 N.Ed.2d 954 (1991)
2. Cremins v. Clancy, 415 Mass. 289, 612 N.E.2d 1183 (1993)
3. Makynen v. Mustakangas, 39 Mass. App. Ct. 309, 655 N.E.2d 1284 (1995)
4. Langemann v. Davis, 398 Mass. 166, 495 N.E.2d 847 (1986)
5. Wallace v. Wilson, 411 Mass. 8, 575 N.E.2d 1134 (1991)

Decide with the rest of your group members if you want to divide up the cases. Everybody must read at least one of the above cases. You may read more than one if you choose to do so.

You do not need to write a formal case brief for the case(s) you read but you do need to be able to explain to the rest of your group members the court's reasoning and the principles of law from the case. If the court decided the case differently than your group had decided, see how the court's analysis differs from your group's analysis. On Thursday, we will want to see your notes or some evidence that you have completed this assignment.