{
  "id": 11795050,
  "name": "ESTATE OF DWAINE LYDELL DARBY, by Liston S. Darby, Administrator, Plaintiff v. MONROE OIL COMPANY, INCORPORATED and CITY OF MONROE BOARD OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL, Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs v. ESTATE OF OTIS STEPHEN BLOUNT, by Joseph L. Hutcherson, II, Administrator, Third-Party Defendant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Estate of Darby ex rel. Darby v. Monroe Oil Co.",
  "decision_date": "1997-08-19",
  "docket_number": "No. COA96-1381",
  "first_page": "301",
  "last_page": "304",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "127 N.C. App. 301"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "121 S.E.2d 589",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1961,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "255 N.C. 412",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8569896
      ],
      "year": 1961,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/255/0412-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "153 S.E.2d 741",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "270 N.C. 25",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8565060
      ],
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/270/0025-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "284 S.E.2d 298",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1981,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "305"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "304 N.C. 447",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8569083
      ],
      "year": 1981,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "458"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/304/0447-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 430,
    "char_count": 7050,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.771,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.3181068408277913e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7892730425596242
    },
    "sha256": "43e212fc2cabfa96c1c080547cfd6d0f711db10334eea3b34f31ac62ca72a978",
    "simhash": "1:fbc59d4d5c051f72",
    "word_count": 1190
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:43:16.540119+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges LEWIS and MARTIN, John C., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "ESTATE OF DWAINE LYDELL DARBY, by Liston S. Darby, Administrator, Plaintiff v. MONROE OIL COMPANY, INCORPORATED and CITY OF MONROE BOARD OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL, Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs v. ESTATE OF OTIS STEPHEN BLOUNT, by Joseph L. Hutcherson, II, Administrator, Third-Party Defendant"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "WYNN, Judge.\nThis civil action arose out of an alcohol related single car accident that occurred shortly after midnight on 1 May 1993 in Union County, North Carolina. Tragically, the accident killed all of the occupants including the driver, Otis Blount; the front seat passenger and owner of the vehicle, Dwaine Lydell Darby; and two backseat passengers, Melissa Mullis and Patricia Teel. All were under twenty-one (21) years of age.\nViewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the appellant Estate of Darby, as we must in deciding the propriety of a summary judgment, we find that the record indicates that earlier that evening, Blount on at least two occasions purchased liquor for himself and others from a store operated by the Monroe County Alcoholic Beverage Control Board. (\u201cMonroe ABC\u201d). Afterwards, Blount and Dwaine Darby gathered with others at TJ\u2019s, a local teen spot in Monroe, North Carolina. While at that night spot, someone used what appears to have been car keys to scratch the initial \u201cDK\u201d into Darby\u2019s car. Thereafter, Blount drove Darby\u2019s car \u2014 with Darby as a passenger \u2014 in search of the person suspected of making the scratch. The record indicates that Blount drove Darby\u2019s car wildly through Union County, traveling at high speeds, careening off the road twice and spinning into a ditch. Unable to find the person suspected of making the initials, they returned to TJ\u2019s.\nFor reasons not given in the record, the group including Blount, Darby and other teens were asked to leave TJ\u2019s. They decided to go to one of the teens\u2019 house for a party. Before leaving the night spot, several of the teens contributed money so that Blount could buy beer for them for the party. Darby did not contribute any money; however, he drove his car with Blount, Mullis and Teel as passengers to a convenience store operated by Monroe Oil Company, Inc. (\u201cMonroe Oil Company\u201d). There, Blount purchased beer and returned to the car, but this time as the driver. On the way to the party, Blount ran off the road and crashed into a tree killing all occupants.\nDarby\u2019s estate sued Monroe ABC and Monroe Oil Company under N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 18B-120 et seq. (1996) (\u201cthe Dram Shop Act\u201d) and N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 28A-18 et seq. (1996) (\u201cthe Wrongful Death Statute\u201d). Following a pretrial hearing, the trial court denied Monroe ABC\u2019s motion for summary judgment but granted summary judgment in favor of Monroe Oil. Prior to the trial of the claim against Monroe ABC, Darby\u2019s estate settled with Monroe ABC and the trial court entered judgment accordingly. Thereafter, Darby\u2019s estate appealed the earlier grant of summary judgment in favor of Monroe Oil to this Court.\nThe dispositive issue on appeal is whether Dwaine Darby aided and abetted Otis Blount in the purchase of beer from Monroe Oil and therefore is not an \u201caggrieved party\u201d within the meaning of the Dram Shop Act. We hold that he did and therefore conclude that his estate may not recover against Monroe Oil under the Dram Shop Act.\nAn action brought under the Dram Shop Act is an action brought against the permittee or local Alcohol Beverage Control Board for negligently selling or furnishing alcohol to an underage person who, after becoming impaired, negligently operates a vehicle and causes injury. N.C.G.S. \u00a7 18B-121. To recover under the Dram Shop Act, an individual must be an \u201caggrieved party\u201d as defined by that statute which states:\n\u201cAggrieved party\u201d means a person who sustains an injury as a consequence of the actions of the underage person, but does not include the underage person or a person who aided or abetted in the sale or furnishing to the underage person.\nN.C.G.S. \u00a7 18B-120 (emphasis added).\nOur Courts have not previously addressed the issue of what constitutes \u201caiding and abetting\u201d in the context of the Dram Shop Act. We are, however, guided by a plethora of criminal law cases which define that term as:\nAn aider or abettor is a person who is actually or constructively present at the scene of the crime and who aids, advises, counsels, instigates or encourages another to commit the offense.\nState v. Barnette, 304 N.C. 447, 458, 284 S.E.2d 298, 305 (1981); State v. Bell, 270 N.C. 25, 153 S.E.2d 741 (1967); State v. Hargett, 255 N.C. 412, 121 S.E.2d 589 (1961); 7 Strong\u2019s North Carolina Index 4th, Criminal Law \u00a7 44 (1989).\nIn this case, the pertinent facts show that Blount and Darby were part of a group of teens who gathered at TJ\u2019s, a local teen night spot in Monroe, North Carolina. The group was asked to leave the club and they decided to go to someone\u2019s home for a party. Before leaving TJ\u2019s, the group decided to get some alcohol and several of them contributed money so that Blount could purchase beer. While the evidence tends to indicate that Darby did not contribute any money towards the purchase of the alcohol, he did drive Blount to the convenience store in his own car. Once at the store, he waited in his car while Blount purchased the beer and upon Blount\u2019s return to the vehicle, he permitted Blount to drive his car with the illegally purchased beer. Thus, irrefutably Darby actively assisted Blount in the purchase of the beer. Under these facts, we must find that he \u201caided and abetted\u201d Blount in the purchase of the beer. We are therefore constrained by the legislature\u2019s \u201caided and abetted\u201d exception to the definition of an \u201caggrieved party\u201d to find that his estate\u2019s claim under the Dram Shop Act is barred as a matter of law.\nAccordingly, the order of the trial court granting Monroe Oil\u2019s motion for summary judgment is,\nAffirmed.\nJudges LEWIS and MARTIN, John C., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "WYNN, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Griffin, Caldwell, Helder, Lee & Helms, P.A., by W. David Lee and R. Kenneth Helms, Jr., for plaintiff",
      "Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, P.L.L.C., by Timothy G. Barber and Steven D. Gardner, for defendant Monroe Oil Company."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "ESTATE OF DWAINE LYDELL DARBY, by Liston S. Darby, Administrator, Plaintiff v. MONROE OIL COMPANY, INCORPORATED and CITY OF MONROE BOARD OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL, Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs v. ESTATE OF OTIS STEPHEN BLOUNT, by Joseph L. Hutcherson, II, Administrator, Third-Party Defendant\nNo. COA96-1381\n(Filed 19 August 1997)\nIntoxicating Liquor \u00a7 63 (NCI4th)\u2014 car accident \u2014 Dram Shop Act \u2014 underage driver \u2014 aiding and abetting\nThe trial court did not err by granting summary judgment for defendant Monroe Oil Company in an action under the Dram Shop Act, N.C.G.S. \u00a7 18B-120 et seq., where the court concluded that the plaintiff was not an \u201caggrieved party\u201d within the meaning of the Act because the evidence indicated that plaintiff\u2019s decedent assisted the underage driver of the car in purchasing the alcohol which contributed to the accident. Although the courts have not previously addressed the issue of what constitutes \u201caiding and abetting\u201d in the context of the Dram Shop Act, there are a plethora of criminal cases which define the term.\nAppeal by plaintiff from order entered 31 January 1996 by Judge Peter M. McHugh in Union County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 5 June 1997.\nGriffin, Caldwell, Helder, Lee & Helms, P.A., by W. David Lee and R. Kenneth Helms, Jr., for plaintiff\nWomble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, P.L.L.C., by Timothy G. Barber and Steven D. Gardner, for defendant Monroe Oil Company."
  },
  "file_name": "0301-01",
  "first_page_order": 337,
  "last_page_order": 340
}