Kimberley Hoff 28-Sep 2012 PAR 116 Negligence Duty assignment If the firm is to argue on behalf of Arnold that

t Stevens parents are liable, I would cite Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) 12-47-801, which establishes that social hosts owe their guests only the same level of duty as a licensee, not an invitee, and are not responsible for third-party torts--EXCEPT when the host knowingly provides alcohol to guests under the age of 211. It is not clear from the current information whether or not Stevens parents knew that alcohol was going to be served, whether they played any role in obtaining it, and whether they were aware of how many people on the guest list were underage, all of which could potentially be relevant to the success or failure of the case2. Given that this was a high school graduation party, however, it should have been obvious that almost all in attendance would not yet be 21 and thus few guests would be old enough to drink legally. In addition, even though Steven wanted his parents out of the way for the evening, that would not have precluded them from checking in from time to time to monitor what was going on rather than simply ignoring the proceedings for the entire night. If Stevens parents were to fight the tort claim, I anticipate that they would argue their knowingness in providing alcohol to minors. It is not sufficient to show that the parents supplied the premises on which the alcohol was consumed, or even to show that the parents helped collect beer money: some level of control over the distribution of the alcohol must be established in order for liability to apply1. In addition, since laws targeting underage drinking at house parties are sometimes applied to implicate in delinquency all minors present at a party where minors have access to alcohol3, Arnold may be seen by the court to be at fault for part of his own injury, especially if he was aware that alcohol would be served there and/or consumed it himself. Given the requirement for knowing provision of alcohol to minors, how it has been enforced by Colorado courts1, and the general reluctance of Colorado to assign liability to social hosts outside of the providing alcohol to minors exception4, I see it as unlikely that Arnold would prevail in this tort case. Unless information emerged during discovery that showed Stevens parents played a much more active role in obtaining and providing the alcohol to underage guests, the case would likely fail to prove sufficient knowledge of the illegal activity.

1 2

Forrest v. Lorrigan, 833 P.2d 873, 874 (Colo. App. 1992). Dickman v. Jackalope, Inc., 870 P.2d 1261 (Colo. App. 1994). 3 ARCHS Institute. Holding Adults Accountable for Underage Drinking at House Parties Through Social Host Laws, Institute for Public Strategies (www.publicstrategies.org), 2009. http://www.publicstrategies.org/PDF/20091015_Social_Host_While_Paper_Final_R3.pdf 4 Rojas v. Engineered Plastic Designs, Inc., 68 P.3d 591, 592 (Colo. App. 2003).