MATTHEW KEEFE VS. XAVIER FERNANDEZ(L-2250-11, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-3760-14T2
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Jun 30, 2017Background
- Plaintiff Matthew Keefe was severely injured by a drunken driver (Xavier Fernandez) who had attended a large baby shower at a fire hall. The driver’s intoxication and the injuries were undisputed.
- The baby shower was organized by Federico Faria; Melissa Chartoff (defendant) secured use of the Ridgefield Fire Department social hall through her father (Gary Chartoff), printed invitations, and carried decorations. She did not create the guest list, serve drinks, choose food, or hire vendors.
- Gary Chartoff approved hall use as a fire company member; Andrew Chartoff attended as the fire company representative to protect the premises and handle cleanup. Neither Gary nor Andrew were involved in party planning or beverage service and did not know the driver.
- Plaintiff sued multiple defendants alleging social-host liability under N.J.S.A. 2A:15-5.5–5.8. The trial court granted summary judgment to Gary and Andrew; the case proceeded to a 21-day jury trial against Melissa, which returned a verdict in her favor (no social-host liability).
- Plaintiff moved for JNOV/new trial arguing (inter alia) that the Chartoffs were social hosts, the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, and the judge’s interruptions and a sua sponte jury instruction during plaintiff’s summation prejudiced the case. The trial court denied relief; the Appellate Division affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Gary and Andrew Chartoff were "social hosts" under N.J.S.A. 2A:15-5.5–5.8 | Gary and Andrew invited guests or otherwise participated enough in the event to be social hosts | Their involvement was limited to approving hall use (Gary) and representing the fire company to protect premises (Andrew); neither provided alcohol or helped plan the party | Summary judgment for Gary and Andrew affirmed — as a matter of law they were not social hosts |
| Whether Melissa Chartoff was a social host liable for injuries caused by an intoxicated guest | Melissa’s actions (designing/printing invitations, bringing decorations, procuring the hall) constituted an express or implied invitation and thus made her a social host | Melissa only assisted with hall access and invitations; she did not provide alcohol, control guest list, or know the driver | Jury found Melissa not a social host; verdict sustained (JNOV/new trial denied) |
| Whether inclusion of nonparty Faria on the verdict allocation was improper | Plaintiff argued Faria should not appear on verdict sheet for apportionment | Defendants and court relied on comparative negligence allocation rules requiring allocation among settling and non-settling parties | Inclusion of Faria on the allocation portion was legally correct; moot because jury never reached allocation questions |
| Whether the judge’s interruptions and sua sponte jury instruction during plaintiff’s summation prejudiced the trial | Counsel claimed interruptions and the curative instruction (re: improper attacks on defense) demeaned plaintiff’s counsel and undermined the case | Court argued the summation contained improper disparagement and conspiracy implications that required correction; instruction clarified lawyers’ comments are not evidence | No reversible error: instruction was warranted and did not produce a miscarriage of justice; affirmance |
Key Cases Cited
- Henry v. N.J. Dep't of Human Servs., 204 N.J. 320 (de novo review standard for summary judgment)
- Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520 (summary judgment standard and inferences to non-moving party)
- Lippman v. Ethicon, Inc., 222 N.J. 362 (interpretation of facts and inferences on summary judgment)
- Sons of Thunder, Inc. v. Borden, Inc., 148 N.J. 396 (standard for disturbing jury verdict and reviewing jury charge)
- Brodsky v. Grinnell Haulers, Inc., 181 N.J. 102 (allocation of fault among settling and non-settling defendants)
- Tartaglia v. UBS PaineWebber, Inc., 197 N.J. 81 (latitude in closing argument balanced against improper commentary)
- Risko v. Thompson Muller Auto. Grp., Inc., 206 N.J. 506 (new trial standard; miscarriage of justice threshold)