Our Blog

Estate Of DUI Accident Victim Sues Owner Of Nationally Recognized Charleston Restaurant

Estate Of DUI Accident Victim Sues Owner Of Nationally Recognized Charleston Restaurant

Last week your Charleston personal injury lawyers read several articles concerning a wrongful death lawsuit stemming from a highly publicized fatal auto accident involving an employee of one of, until recent poor reviews, the most celebrated and honored fine eateries in America. The lawsuit is briefly covered below, along with a short description of a fatal work accident in Summerville.

The Neighborhood Dining Group, Inc., the restaurant development and management company that manages and oversees the day-to-day operations of Husk Restaurant, has been served a wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of the estate of a man killed in a December 17, 2011 auto accident involving an Assistant Manager from the restaurant. The lawsuit, filed in the Court of Common Pleas for the Ninth Judicial Circuit of South Carolina, alleges that The Neighborhood Dining Group, Inc., doing business as Husk, was negligent in allowing said Assistant Manager to consume free alcohol in excess on Husk premises after the restaurant was closed, and then drive under the influence. The suit seeks in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact or, more commonly, to be determined by a jury.

The fatal car accident occurred in the wee hours of the morning on December 17, 2011, around 4:00 a.m. as the Assistant Manager was attempting to go to Mt. Pleasant. While traveling north on the Arthur Ravenel Bridge the Assistant Manager Audi slammed into the rear of a Mustang driven by a 32-year-old man, also of Mt. Pleasant. The crash caused both vehicles to careen out of control, sending the Mustang into a concrete barrier. The Mustang then burst into flames with the driver trapped inside with, according to the lawsuit, “multiple body traumas,” which led to his “excruciating” and unfortunate death.

The Assistant Manager faces a charge of felony driving under the influence (DUI). It was alleged that his blood-alcohol content was .242 at the time of his arrest, a hair higher than three times the legal limit in South Carolina. As mentioned in previous posts, under the South Carolina Code of Laws, a person convicted of felony DUI when death results must be punished by a mandatory fine of no less than $10, 100 nor more than $25, 100. And must be punished by mandatory imprisonment of no less than one year nor more than 25 years. Additionally, the sentences imposed upon a person convicted of felony DUI cannot be suspended, and probation cannot be granted for any portion.

Beyond the obvious issue the wrongful death suit reflects (drunk driving), the complaint also raises questions about the employee culture in restaurants and the practice of allowing employees to remain after hours to socialize and drink with co-workers, often for free. It will be interesting to see if other area restaurants put an end to this practice, if they haven’t already.

Related only in that its tragic incident and untimely death, the Post and Courier reported on a fatal job accident that occurred Tuesday at an asphalt plant in Summerville. The 48-year-old man, of Moncks Corner, died at a hospital after he became caught in cement auger while doing routine maintenance on the machine. The Berkeley County Coroner said that man died from traumatic injuries and ruled the death as an accident.

It just came to the attention of your Charleston, SC lawyers that the South Carolina State House of Representatives approved a bill (measure 93-15) banning drivers from texting or reading electronic messages on state roadways. However, the bill exempts messages sent through voice-operated devices. Before heading to the Senate measure 93-15 faces another perfunctory vote in the House. It’s good to see South Carolina taking legislative steps to promote safe driving practices. Who knows, the next move may be to require motorcyclist wear helmets, but we’re certainly not holding our breath at Howell and Christmas.

The contents of this Web site are for informational purposes regarding legal issues in South Carolina and are not intended to convey detailed legal advice on specific issues. Transmission of the information contained in this site or any sites linked hereto is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Our attorneys practice law only in jurisdictions we are properly authorized to do so and do not seek to represent anyone in any jurisdiction where this site does not comply with applicable laws and bar rules. The lawyers of the law firm of Christmas Law Firm are licensed to practice law in the State of South Carolina. Readers should not act upon the information contained in this site without first seeking the advice of an attorney licensed to practice in your area.

Attorneys principally practice in Mt. Pleasant office, but we will meet you at the time and office most convenient to you. We will also come to your hospital room or home upon request.

The information given above are examples of actual cases with actual clients our law firm has handled in the past. The reviews listed on our website are endorsements and/or testimonials from actual clients. Any results our law firm may achieve on behalf of one client in one matter does not necessarily indicate similar results can be obtained for other clients.