Drive drunk, hurt yourself, and blame someone else

Brick Township resident Frederick Voss was drunk when he crashed his motorcycle into a car in November 2006.  His blood alcohol level that night was 0.196 percent – nearly 2 and a half times the legal limit. 

Unfortunately, I don’t need to remind you how grave the consequences could have been for Voss’s poor decisions.  We’re reminded of drunken driving injuries and deaths far too often, and they’re 100% preventable.  Based on published reports in the Asbury Park Press and the New Jersey Law Journal, it appears, fortunately, that Voss didn’t injure anyone other than himself.  He pleaded guilty to driving while intoxicated. 

In situations like Voss’s, the best case-scenario is that the drunk driver considers it karma, takes responsibility for his or her actions and does not endanger innocent motorists or pedestrians again. 

Instead, Voss claims that injuries he suffered as a result of the accident weren’t his fault.  They resulted from being “negligently served” alcohol at Tiffany’s Restaurant in Toms River. 

He’s decided to sue.  And as of Wednesday, he is officially cleared to do so. 

In 1997, the Legislature amended motor vehicle insurance law to state that a driver convicted of DWI in connection with an accident “shall have no cause of action for his or her injuries.”  But the Dram Shop Act, which was enacted 10 years earlier, allows people who suffer a loss to sue licensed servers who knowingly served an intoxicated person prior to an accident.  While it doesn’t explicitly state that who can sue under the Dram Shop Law, it’s usually the victim of a drunken driver suing an establishment – not the drunken driver suing the establishment for ‘making’ him or her drunk.  In Voss v. Tranquilino, the New Jersey Appellate Court ruled yesterday that liquor establishments are not protected by a state law which bars drunken drivers involved in accidents from suing other parties for economic and noneconomic damages.  This ruling upholds a previous ruling by Ocean County Superior Court Judge John A. Peterson and allows Voss and his attorney to pursue their claim against the restaurant. 

 Unless the bar tenders at Tiffany’s held him down and force-fed him alcohol against his will, I fail to understand why he isn’t responsible for his own actions.  But according to the New Jersey Appellate Court’s interpretation of the 1997 law, it makes no difference whether you are the victim of a drunk driver, or the drunk driver himself: you have the right to sue the dram shop.  In his opinion, Judge Joseph Lisa stated that the Legislature “could not have thought it could reduce the number of drunken drivers by immunizing liquor establishments from their claims and thus providing a disincentive to the licensees.”  The Court points to a provision of the 1987 law which was vetoed by Governor Tom Kean, which would have barred dram shop claims by passengers who knew a driver was drunk.  The Court said it indicated that “the Legislature considered, but ultimately rejected, the immunity Tiffany’s now urges us to find.”

The only lesson Voss’s situation teaches to New Jersey residents is that sometimes you can profit from failing to take personal responsibility for your actions. In a nod to our increasingly litigious culture, when you have done something wrong and suffered because of it, you can pass the buck onto whomever you think may have the most bucks. 

Attorneys for Tiffany’s have not decided whether to appeal.  It’s unclear how much Voss hopes to extract from them.  But at 46, Voss is clearly not embarrassed about crashing his motorcycle into a car while drunk when he can profit from it. 

Comments

[Pete]

I remember Fred Voss from middle school and high school. He was a real jerk back then and tryed to bully others younger and smaller then him. Sounds like he is the same way today.