Parents Can Be Liable For Their Kids’ Drinking

For two weeks Jeffrey and Sara Hutsell became household words in Chicago.

They are the Deerfield couple who were convicted of endangering the life of a child and lying to police investigating a fatal car crash involving teenagers in an underage drinking party at their home.

During the six-day trial, some of the teens who attended the party testified that they saw Jeffrey Hutsell, the father, in the basement with beer clearly evident. Mom and dad testified that they were upstairs watching a baseball game, and were unaware of any drinking.

Two 18-year-old party guests were killed when the car they were in crashed into a tree at the end of the Hutsell’s driveway as they returned to the party.

The 18-year-old driver’s blood alcohol level was nearly twice the legal limit. The couple will be sentenced this month. The maximum penalty for the misdemeanor is a year in jail, probation, and a fine of $2,500.

In response to the Hutsell case, State Sen. Susan Garrett (D-Lake Forest) sponsored S.B. 158, which stiffens penalties for parents who knowingly permit underage drinking in their homes. Under the new law, if a person’s conduct directly or indirectly results in injury or death, it would be considered a Class 4 felony. The new penalty would be one to three years in prison, probation, and a fine of up to $25,000.

The bill unanimously passed the state Senate and House earlier this legislative session, and the governor has until Sept. 2 to sign the bill into law, which would become effective immediately. Although a new criminal law would not affect the Hutsells, the civil consequences of their conduct remains to be seen.

Six days after the Hutsells are scheduled to be sentenced, another new law regarding the civil liability of providing alcohol to minors will be tested in state court. The Drug or Alcohol Impaired Minor Responsibility Act, 740 ILCS 58/1 (2004), provides for damages against a person who willfully supplies alcoholic liquor or illegal drugs to one under age 18.

Effective in 2004, the injured person or the surviving next of kin can sue for economic and non-economic damages, as well as attorneys fees, litigation expenses, and punitive damages.

This case involves four 16-year-old Kenosha, Wisc., girls who were invited to a Halloween party in 2004 in Lake County, Ill. The driver of the car drank beer from a keg that was provided at the function, then drove her friends on Route 41, were she made an illegal left turn in front of an approaching semi-trailer. It struck their car and one of the girls in the back seat suffered severe permanent injuries.

It is believed to be the first case to go to trial under this new law, according to the plaintiff’s lawyer, Michael Demetrio of Corboy & Demetrio. Wolkomir v. Patch 22, Ltd., No. 05 L 624.

The Illinois law will be tested again in a wrongful-death case that was filed last month by Corboy & Demetrio against the parent of a Glenview teenager who hosted a party in 2005 that also ended in tragedy.

A 15-year-old boy attended the party and later drowned in a pond nearby with an alcohol level of .266, three times the legal limit.

His mother brought suit against the parents where the party was held, under the Drug or Alcohol Impaired Minor Responsibility Act and the Illinois Dram Shop Act, 235 ILCS 5/1 et.seq.

Prior to the passage of the new law, the Illinois Supreme Court considered civil liability in alcohol-related injuries and deaths in Wakulich v. Mraz, 203 Ill2d 223, 785 N.E.2d 8443 (2003).

In that case, then-Chief Justice Mary Ann McMorrow specially concurred and found that the liquor control laws were not meant to allow adults to negligently provide alcohol to minors and then drive and cause injury or death, and then hide behind dram shop laws.

The Illinois Dram Shop act applies to licensed commercial vendors who cause the intoxication of a patron who subsequently causes injury. The law, however, does not purport to extend beyond those in the business of serving alcohol, as Chief Justice McMorrow concluded.

(I discussed this case in depth in a previous column. "Case Limits Liability of Adult who Serve Kids Alcohol," October, 2003).

Shortly after that case, the new law, 740 ILCS 58/1 (2004), quietly went into effect. Meanwhile, front-page headlines across the country continue to scream alcohol and teens. Not only have we been witness to Lindsay Lohan’s mug shot after her car struck a tree when her blood alcohol level was reportedly well over the legal limit, but it seems to be part of a new culture to drink and drive.

After years of trying to enforce laws banning the sale of alcohol to minors, the Underage Drinking Enforcement Training Center in Maryland, which was established by the federal government to support underage drinking laws, now has shifted its focus toward preventing adults from providing alcohol to minors.

According to the center, hundreds of local communities and 33 states have social-host laws that hold adults who serve alcohol to minors liable for any injury or damage caused by the intoxicated youths. Typically, ordinances call for a civil fine, and often give law enforcement the authority to break up a party. Many statutes, like Illinois’, provide for the recovery of damages.

In sending a message to teens and parents, it is clear that authorities are getting tougher on parties involving underage drinking.

In late July, Cook County Sheriff’s Police raided a home in Northfield Township and ticketed 46 youths for possession and consumption of alcohol by an underage person.

The parents were charged with unlawfully permitting a minor to become intoxicated. Their 22-year-old son was charged with obstruction of justice.

Without vigilance and discipline, tragedy certainly can ensue. It is also clear that if kids won’t change their ways, parents will have to change theirs.