Juliano v. Simpson, 461 Mass. 527

Sixteen-year-old Juliano suffered serious injuries in a car crash after leaving a party hosted by Jessica Simpson, with Dunbar (19) who had alcohol brought to the party driving.
Jessica’s father was away; Jessica had sole control of the premises where underage drinking occurred.
Plaintiffs asserted social host negligence and statutory violations under G. L. c. 138, § 34 for permitting underage possession of alcohol on premises under Jessica’s control.
Superior Court granted summary judgment dismissing social host claims, prompting direct appellate review of those claims against Jessica.
Mass. courts have historically limited social host liability to cases where the host served alcohol or exerted effective control over the alcohol supply.
The court ultimately declined to expand social host liability to an underage host who knowingly allowed underage drinking but did not supply the alcohol.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the common-law duty of social hosts extends to an underage host who knowingly permits drinking at home without supplying alcohol	Juliano argues duty should extend to underage hosts who facilitate drinking.	Simpson argues the duty remains limited to those who serve or control alcohol supply.	No expansion of social host duty; liability remains only where alcohol is served or effectively controlled.
Whether G. L. c. 138, § 34 creates a private tort action for social hosts	Statutory provisions imply civil liability for furnishing to minors.	Statute is criminal; no private right of action inferred absent legislative creation.	No private right of action inferred from § 34; private duty must arise under common law.
Whether violation of § 34 constitutes negligence per se to impose tort liability	Violation supports a breach of duty via negligence per se.	Statutory violation is only some evidence of negligence, not itself a duty; need existing duty.	Violation is not by itself a breach of duty; duty must exist under common law.
Whether public policy and social values support expanding social host liability in this context	Expansion is warranted to curb underage drinking and driving.	Expansion is unworkable and lacks clear social consensus; legislative action preferred.	Court declines expansion; policy concerns and lack of clear social consensus justify maintaining current rule.

McGuiggan v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co., 398 Mass. 152 (Mass. 1986) (recognized social host liability when host served alcohol)
Langemann v. Davis, 398 Mass. 166 (Mass. 1986) (no duty where host did not provide alcohol)
Alioto v. Marnell, 402 Mass. 36 (Mass. 1988) (no social host liability where parents did not provide alcohol)
Wallace v. Wilson, 411 Mass. 8 (Mass. 1991) (limits liability when host merely allows possession of alcohol)
Ulwick v. DeChristopher, 411 Mass. 401 (Mass. 1991) (no liability where host lacks control of alcohol supply)
Cremins v. Clancy, 415 Mass. 289 (Mass. 1993) (limits duty without effective control over alcohol supply)
Remy v. MacDonald, 440 Mass. 675 (Mass. 2004) (policy considerations shaping social host liability scope)
Manning v. Nobile, 411 Mass. 382 (Mass. 1991) (no liability for self-inflicted injuries to an intoxicated guest)