BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2486
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 23, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
AB 2486 (Feuer) - As Introduced: February 19, 2010
As Proposed to Be Amended
SUBJECT : SOCIAL HOST PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY: KNOWINGLY
PROVIDING ALCOHOL TO MINORS
KEY ISSUE : SHOULD CALIFORNIA HOLD ADULTS LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE
FOR UNDERAGE DRINKING AT THEIR HOMES WHEN THEY KNOWINGLY PROVIDE
THE ALCOHOL TO THE MINORS WHO ARE SUBSEQUENTLY INJURED OR
KILLED?
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed
non-fiscal.
SYNOPSIS
This non-controversial parental responsibility bill seeks to
enact the Teen Alcohol Safety Act of 2010, which seeks to add
California to the large preponderance of states that impose
potential "social host" liability on adults who knowingly
provide alcohol to minors who are subsequently injured or killed
as a result of the underage drinking. Currently, unlike the
approach of the great majority of states, a social host in
California who provides alcoholic beverages to any person,
including even minors, may never be held legally responsible for
any damages suffered by that person or by any third person
resulting from consumption of those beverages - even if serious
injuries or deaths result to underage drinking minors. This
bill seeks to take away the liability shield given to parental
social hosts in California and instead holds adults legally
accountable only when they knowingly provide alcohol to minors
who are subsequently injured or killed. In support of the bill,
proponents, who include the devastated family members of minors
who have died from binge drinking as well as both the plaintiffs
and defense bar and a host of law enforcement and public safety
groups, state that underage drinking is a widespread and
increasingly dangerous problem which has devastating
consequences for minors and their families and friends. They
note that targeted social host liability has proved itself in
many other states as one potential way to help discourage
AB 2486
Page 2
underage drinking. Proponents also believe firmly that holding
adults legally responsible when they knowingly provide alcohol
to minors will help reduce access to alcohol for minors and in
turn help reduce the number of preventable alcohol-related
childhood deaths and injuries. There is no known opposition to
this public health measure.
SUMMARY : Seeks to enact the Teen Alcohol Safety Act of 2010,
adding California to the large preponderance of states that
impose potential "social host" liability on adults who knowingly
provide alcohol to minors who are subsequently injured or killed
as a result of this lack of parental care. Specifically, this
bill:
1)Provides that a social host, as narrowly defined, who is 21
years of age or older and who knowingly furnishes alcoholic
beverages to a person under 21 years of age may be held
legally accountable for damages suffered by that person, or
for injury to the person or property, or death of, any third
person resulting from the consumption of those beverages.
2)Carefully limits the measure's scope, pursuant to Author's
Amendments described more fully below, by defining a "social
host" as only those adults who provide alcohol to guests at
their residence with no motive for pecuniary gain who are not
licensed or commercial vendors of alcohol or anyone who is
required to obtain a license to provide alcohol for a social
function.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that everyone is responsible, not only for the result
of his or her willful acts, but also for an injury occasioned
to another by his or her want of ordinary care or skill in the
management of his or her property or person, except so far as
the latter has, willfully or by want of ordinary care, brought
the injury upon himself or herself. (Civil Code section
1714(a). Hereafter, all references are to that code unless
otherwise noted.)
2)States that it is the intent of the Legislature to abrogate
the holdings in cases such as Vesely v. Sager (1971) 5 Cal.3d
153, Bernhard v. Harrah's Club (1976) 16 Cal.3d 313, and
Coulter v. Superior Court (1978) 21 Cal.3d 144 and to
reinstate the prior judicial interpretation of this section as
AB 2486
Page 3
it relates to proximate cause for injuries incurred as a
result of furnishing alcoholic beverages to an intoxicated
person, namely that the furnishing of alcoholic beverages is
not the proximate cause of injuries resulting from
intoxication, but rather the consumption of alcoholic
beverages is the proximate cause of injuries inflicted upon
another by an intoxicated person. (Section 1714(b).)
3)Provides (unlike the approach of the great majority of states)
that no social host in California who furnishes alcoholic
beverages to any person, including minors, may be held legally
accountable for damages suffered by that person, or for injury
to the person or property of, or death of, any third person,
resulting from the consumption of those beverages. (Section
1714(c).)
4)Provides that a social host may be found criminally liable if,
"A parent or legal guardian who knowingly permits his or his
child, or a person in the company of the child, or both, who
are under the age of 18 years, to consume an alcoholic
beverage or use a controlled substance at the home of the
parent or legal guardian" under specified conditions.
(Business and Professions Code section 25658.2.)
5)Provides that an insurer is not liable for a loss caused by
the willful act of the insured. (Insurance Code section 533.)
COMMENTS : This non-controversial parental responsibility bill
seeks to enact the Teen Alcohol Safety Act of 2010, which seeks
to add California to the large preponderance of states who
impose potential "social host" liability on those adults who
knowingly provide alcohol to minors who are subsequently injured
or killed as a result of this lack of parental responsibility.
Currently, unlike the approach of the great majority of states,
a social host in California who provides alcoholic beverages to
any person, including even minors, may never be held legally
responsible for any damages suffered by that person or by any
third person resulting from consumption of those beverages -
even if serious injuries or deaths result to minors.
In support of this measure the author states:
The Teen Alcohol Safety Act of 2010 is all about parental
responsibility. It is a measure designed to save young
lives by acting as a long-needed disincentive to
AB 2486
Page 4
irresponsible adults who knowingly provide underage teens
with alcohol in their homes. California has seen a spate of
heart-wrenching tragedies in recent years, including the
preventable recent death of Shelby Allen, as teens have
increasingly engaged in bouts of binge drinking that have
led to hospitalizations and deaths. The most shocking
episodes involved parents or other adults who knowingly
provide alcohol to underage minors - and this bill only
targets those most egregious situations.
Although it is a crime under state law to supply alcohol to
a minor, California is one of only a small handful of
states that do not provide for parental responsibility in
such shocking cases. In order to augment appropriate
parental responsibility and bolster the deterrence sought
in the preponderance of states across the country, this
targeted measure seeks to correct that glaring restriction
in our law by ensuring that a civil action can be brought
only against an adult "social host" who knowingly provides
alcohol to minors at the front end of such tragedies, in
order to appropriately assist families and their minors who
are harmed by this irresponsible misconduct. It is truly
not a clich? to note that if this measure saves only one
child from a binge drinking death, it will be well worth
it.
In support of the narrow approach taken in the bill, the author
underscores the measure is not about somehow imposing "automatic
liability" on any adult who may have inadvertently provided
access to alcohol by a minor. The bill simply removes the
absolute bar to any potential liability in any situations for
adult social hosts who knowingly provide alcohol to minors.
Under the bill, the families of a minor injured or killed by
alcohol will still need to prove in court all the elements of
negligence - that an adult social host, as narrowly defined
below, breached his or her responsibility to uphold the law,
knowingly provided alcohol to the child, and injuries or death
thereby resulted from this action.
States That Currently Permit Parental Responsibility in Their
Social Host Laws : After an extensive survey conducted by
Committee counsel, it appears that the following approximately
80% (39) of the fifty states permit social host civil liability
when adults knowingly provide alcohol to minors: Alabama,
Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida,
AB 2486
Page 5
Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana,
Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana,
Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New
York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington,
Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Other states have used statutory
language describing social host liability in a manner that has
allowed the courts to develop social host liability under common
law when social hosts provide alcohol to minors.
The Problem of Underage Drinking : According to the National
Institutes of Health, underage alcohol use remains a pervasive
and persistent problem with serious health and safety
consequences to minors. Alcohol is literally the drug of choice
for most young people in the United States, and it is still used
by more young people than tobacco or illegal drugs. Indeed,
underage alcohol use actually kills more young people than all
illegal drugs combined -- and alcohol is the leading contributor
to death from injuries, which is the main cause of death for
people under the age of twenty-one. Tragically, every year,
roughly 5,000 young people under the age of twenty-one die from
causes related to underage drinking. According to the Pacific
Institute for Research and Evaluation ("PIRE"), in California
alone, an estimated 136 traffic fatalities and 7,300 nonfatal
traffic injuries involved an underage drinker in one recent
year. In addition to traffic fatalities and injuries, PIRE
reports that underage alcohol consumption is also connected to
crimes and other risky behavior by minors.
Underage drinking is also linked to future alcohol dependence.
According to data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on
Alcohol and Related Conditions, young people who began drinking
under the age of fifteen-years old are four times more likely to
develop alcohol dependence during their lifetime than those who
began drinking at age twenty-one years old or later. (U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. The Surgeon General's
Call to Action to Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking. U.S.
Department of Heath and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon
General, 2007).
The Shocking Statistics Showing A Remarkable Number of Parents
Are Knowingly Providing Alcohol to Minors : Based on the
devastating consequences tied to underage drinking, it is useful
to consider how minors obtain access to alcohol. According to a
2005 American Medical Association (AMA) survey, over half of the
AB 2486
Page 6
teens surveyed reported they obtained alcohol. Amazingly,
one-third of these teens responded that it was easy to get
alcohol from their own consenting parents, and almost half
responded that it was easy to get alcohol from a friend's
parents. In addition, one in four teens has attended a party
where minors were drinking directly in the presence of parents.
According to a US Surgeon General's "Call for Action" report,
social gatherings are a common way for underage drinkers to gain
access to alcohol. This is especially problematic because such
settings, where many drinkers are involved, often lead to binge
drinking by youth and much greater risk of injuries or death.
The Allen Family's Terrible Recent Tragedy : The recent tragedy
of Shelby Allen has helped inspire this measure. In December of
2008, Shelby Allen, a 17-year-old high school student, died of
acute alcohol poisoning the morning after an overnight gathering
with other teenagers at a friend's house. Shelby became
violently ill and lapsed into a semiconscious state during the
night, and when she was discovered the next morning, this very
promising teenager passed away. Though the friend's parents
were home that night, the facts of the case remain unclear.
Shelby's parents considered using the California civil courts in
an attempt to gain answers about this tragedy, but were shocked
to discover, as many other parents have, that unlike most other
states, California's current law continues to grant all social
hosts complete and unqualified immunity from all legal
responsibility, even in cases involving the deaths of minors.
Shelby's tragic death is just one example of the devastating
consequences that can follow underage drinking. As a result,
many groups, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the
PIRE Institute noted earlier, recommend our legal system should
discourage parents from allowing underage drinking in the home,
and they strongly support the establishment and enforcement of
targeted social host laws like the one proffered in this measure
to reduce access to alcohol by underage youth. Proponents of
the bill believe imposing potential civil liability on adult
social hosts who knowingly provide alcohol to minors will not
only enable families of victims to have a possible reasonable
civil recourse, but will also send a powerful message that
providing alcohol to underage youth is morally reprehensible
with potential serious legal consequences.
Social Host Liability Generally : In its simplest form, social
hosts are generally defined in many state laws as persons who
AB 2486
Page 7
are not commercial vendors of alcohol or licensed to sell
alcohol - though as noted below, this bill seeks to enact a much
narrower definition of adults covered by the bill. Social host
laws across the country have traditionally held social hosts
liable for the drinking that occurs in their homes. There are
two types of liability that can traditionally apply under social
host laws: criminal liability and civil liability. Criminal
social host liability involves a statutory prohibition that is
imposed by the state through means of criminal prosecution. An
increasing number of cities and counties throughout California
and the country have focused on criminal liability approaches
(see below). In contrast, civil social host liability imposes a
duty on social hosts that can be enforced through civil actions
brought by injured parties. In a typical civil action, an
injured party would need to establish all the elements of a
cause of action for negligence, including a duty of care, a
breach of that duty, proximate and actual causation, and
damages.
Increasing Numbers of Local Social Host Criminal Approaches : As
noted above, four out of five states across the country have
adopted some form of social host liability. In addition, a
recent trend has emerged where cities and counties are also
adopting their own targeted social host ordinances which impose
some form of liability on social hosts to prevent underage
drinking parties. Under typical city or county criminal
ordinances, social host liability is treated as an infraction or
a misdemeanor, resulting in fines and/or jail time. Local
social host laws generally focus on the venues in which underage
drinking occurs, rather than on the furnishing of the alcohol by
an adult. According to co-sponsor Mothers Against Drunk
Driving, as of 2007, over forty California cities and counties
have adopted some form of local social host laws. For example,
Ventura County passed an ordinance that establishes that it is a
civil violation and a public nuisance constituting an immediate
threat to public health for any responsible person to allow a
loud and unruly gathering at a private residence at which
underage drinking occurs, and that a violation subjects social
hosts to a penalty of one-thousand dollars in addition to any
recovery of emergency response costs. Other localities take
similar approaches.
Legal Backdrop of Civil Social Host Liability in California :
Until the 1970s, California generally followed the common law
rule that it is the consumption, rather than the furnishing, of
AB 2486
Page 8
alcohol that is the "proximate" cause of any subsequent harm
caused by the intoxicated person. This was true even though
California, like virtually all other states, had seemingly
inconsistently, long had statutes making it a misdemeanor to
serve alcohol to a minor. However in a series of cases in the
1970s, the California Supreme Court rejected the traditional
common law reasoning barring parental responsibility for
providing alcohol to others - at least in cases where the
alcohol was furnished to someone who was a minor or an obviously
intoxicated adult. In Vesely v. Sager (1971), the California
Supreme Court determined that civil liability could be imposed
upon a vendor of alcoholic beverages for providing drinks to a
customer who, as a result of intoxication, injured a third
person. Then the Court subsequently reiterated its rejection of
the traditional common law rule in Bernhard v. Harrah's Club in
1976, finding a commercial vendor liable to an injured third
party for serving alcohol to an obviously intoxicated patron who
subsequently drove and veered across a dividing line into the
plaintiff's vehicle. (16 Cal. 3d 313). Finally, in 1978, in
Coulter v. Superior Court of San Mateo County (1978) 21 Cal. 3d
144, the Court expressly extended liability to "social hosts,"
or non-commercial furnishers of alcohol. The Court held that a
social host who furnishes alcoholic beverages to an obviously
intoxicated person, under circumstances which create a
reasonably foreseeable risk of harm to others, could be held
liable to third persons who were subsequently injured by the
intoxicated guest.
The Legislature Rejects the State Supreme Court's Social Host
Responsibility Rule in 1978: Four months after the Supreme
Court's landmark Coulter decision holding social hosts
potentially legally responsible for their actions, the
California Legislature in 1978 amended relevant sections of both
the Business and Professions Code and the Civil Code in order to
restore the traditional common law rule that had shielded social
hosts from liability altogether. The legislation, subsequently
signed into law by then-Governor Jerry Brown, stated the intent
of the Legislature to abrogate the holdings of Vesely, Bernhard,
and Coulter in order to completely shield social hosts in
California from any potential legal responsibility, even in
those cases involving the knowing provision of alcohol to
minors.
This bill therefore, thirty two years later - in response to the
recent reports noted above showing that underage alcohol use
AB 2486
Page 9
actually kills more young people than all illegal drugs combined
- reverses this long-held liability shield in those narrow
circumstances where an adult social host knowingly provides
alcohol to minors who are subsequently injured or killed as a
result of parental irresponsibility.
Author's Clarifying Amendment : In order to clarify that the
bill's parental responsibility provision is carefully targeted
to only those situations where a parent or other adult knowingly
provides alcohol to minors at his or her residence, the author
wisely is amending the bill with the following narrow definition
of who is a social host for purposes of the legislation:
On page 2, after line 24, insert:
(e) For purposed of this Act, a social host is one who
provides alcohol to guests at his or her residence with no
motive for pecuniary gain regardless whether some remuneration
is given for the alcohol. A licensed or commercial vendor of
alcohol, or anyone required to obtain a license to provide
alcohol for a social function, is not a social host for
purposes of this Act.
Arguments In Support : As noted above, proponents assert social
host liability has long proved itself in most states across the
country to be a helpful deterrence to underage drinking. By
holding adults potentially accountable for the harms that follow
underage drinking facilitated by their knowingly providing
alcohol to kids, adults will, proponents note, be much more
hesitant to provide alcohol to minors-in turn, directly reducing
the ability for minors to access alcohol. According to the
measure's co-sponsor, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD),
social host laws encourage adults to be as vigilant as possible
about underage consumption of alcohol. MADD further contends
that some studies have shown that social host liability reduces
binge drinking as well as drinking and driving by young
drinkers. Ultimately, proponents contend the prevalence of
underage drinking and its tragic consequences requires as many
tools as possible to reduce underage drinking, including the use
of potential civil liability.
In support, the California Defense Counsel write that "AB 2486
is designed to make a common-sense correction to the 'social
host' immunity presently contained in Civil Code Section 1714.
The present general immunity for social hosts, founded on sound
AB 2486
Page 10
social policy, should not operate to shield persons who
knowingly furnish alcoholic beverages to minors. In contrast
with the general principle, such an immunity is not sound social
policy? Given the risks associated with underage drinking, it is
unconscionable that the law would operate to shield from
liability persons who knowingly break the law with respect to
in-home social events. AB 2486 makes a narrow, targeted change
to the social host immunity."
In further support of the measure, co-sponsor Consumer Attorneys
of California writes in part that:
AB 2486 is designed to be one more important tool in the
fight against underage drinking. Simply put, AB 2486 will
prevent teen drinking tragedies and will bring California
law into compliance with the majority of other states that
have laws that protect their minors? Under AB 2486, the
social host is not automatically liable for the injuries or
deaths to the minor or any third party. AB 2486 simply
removes an absolute legal impediment for the family to
proceed. The family of the injured or killed would still
need to prove in court all of the elements of negligence:
A duty of care existed, a breach of that duty occurred,
causation, and damages. Negligence, as a basis for social
host liability, is not automatic. Each element must be
proven in order to give rise to social host liability.
And, AB 2486 is extremely limited as it only applies to
social hosts who knowingly provide alcohol to minors? We
think that if people knew they were not protected under the
law and could be exposed to civil damages, conduct would
change. We want to encourage people who have minor guests
to NOT provide alcohol?
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD, co-sponsor)
Consumer Attorneys (CAOC, co-sponsor)
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
California Defense Counsel
California PTA
Consumer Federation of California
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
AB 2486
Page 11
Steve and Debbie Allen
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Drew Liebert and Eunie Kim / JUD. / (916)
319-2334