Kenneth Vercammen (732) 572-0500

2053 Woodbridge Ave. Edison, NJ 08817

Ken is a NJ trial attorney who has published 130 articles in national and New Jersey publications on litigation topics. He was awarded the NJ State Bar Municipal Court Practitioner of the Year. He lectures for the Bar and handles litigation matters. He is Past Chair of the ABA Tort & Insurance Committee, GP on Personal Injury and lectured at the ABA Annual Meeting attended by 10,000 attorneys and professionals.

New clients email us evenings and weekends go to www.njlaws.com/ContactKenV.htm

Saturday, November 14, 2009

KENNETH VERCAMMEN – resume and community involvement

KENNETH VERCAMMEN – resume and community involvement
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500
www.njlaws.com
Kenneth Vercammen is an Edison, Middlesex County, NJ trial attorney who has published 125 articles in national and New Jersey publications on probate, estate planning, criminal and litigation topics. He often lectures to trial lawyers of the American Bar Association, New Jersey State Bar Association and Middlesex County Bar Association.
Kenneth Vercammen was the NJ State Bar Municipal Court Attorney of the Year and past president of the Middlesex County Municipal Prosecutor's Association.

 He is the past chair of the NJ State Bar Association Municipal Court Section. He is the Deputy chair of the ABA Criminal Law committee, GP Division. Kenneth Vercammen was selected one of only three attorneys as a Super Lawyer 2009 in NJ Monthly in the Criminal - DWI.
He is a highly regarded lecturer on litigation issues for the American Bar Association, ICLE, New Jersey State Bar Association and Middlesex County Bar Association. His articles have been published by New Jersey Law Journal, ABA Law Practice Management Magazine, and New Jersey Lawyer. He is the Editor in Chief of the New Jersey Municipal Court Law Review. Mr. Vercammen is a recipient of the NJSBA- YLD Service to the Bar Award. He has successfully handled over One thousand Municipal Court and Superior Court matters in the past 18 years.


Since 1985, his primary concentration has been on litigation matters. Mr. Vercammen gained other legal experiences as the Confidential Law Clerk to the Court of Appeals of Maryland (Supreme Court),with the Delaware County, PA District Attorney Office handling Probable Cause Hearings, Middlesex County Probation Dept as a Probation Officer, and an Executive Assistant to Scranton District Magistrate, Thomas Hart, in Scranton, PA. He started his career as a trial attorney for Drazin & Warshaw in Hazlet and Red Bank, NJ, and Borrus, Goldin, Foley, Vignuolo, Hyman & Stahl in North Brunswick.


ADMISSIONS: Admitted In NJ, NY, PA, US Supreme Court and Federal District Court

MANAGING ATTORNEY Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, PC March 1990-Present
Full service Law practice with offices in Edison and Cranbury.

PROSECUTOR Township of Cranbury, Middlesex County, NJ 1991-1999
Municipal Prosecutor for criminal and traffic cases involving Township and State Police
-Acting Assoc. Prosecutor: Carteret Municipal Court, Middlesex County, NJ 2000

EDITOR- NJ MUNICIPAL COURT LAW REVIEW 1993- present

Middlesex County Bar Association 2008 Municipal Court Attorney of the Year

NJ State Bar Association- 2005-2006 Municipal Court Attorney of the Year Award

New Jersey Super Lawyers selection 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006

Who's Who in America 2004

NJ State Bar Association- 2002 General Practitioner of the Year Award

1993 AWARD WINNER "Service to the Bar Award"- New Jersey State Bar Association YLD

RELEVANT LITIGATION SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS:
-Criminal, DWI and Drug Cases- NJ State Bar Annual Meeting 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 01, 00, 99
-Civil Trial Practice- Middlesex Bar 2004
-Personal Injury Litigation- NJ Institute for Continuing Legal Education/ NJ State Bar
2001, 2000,1999,1998,1997,1996,1995,1994,1993,1991
-Municipal Court Handling Serious Cases ICLE/NJSBA-2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002,2001,2000,1998,1997,1995,1994
-NJ Association of Municipal Court Administrators 2002
-Edison Police Auxiliary- Search and Seizure 2002
-New Jersey Network TV- Due Process TV show 2000
-Cablevision TV- Law on the Line 2003, 2001
-Elder Law and Probate NJSBA/ ICLE 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 03,02,01,99,98,97,96

PUBLICATIONS:
Published 150 separate Law Review and Legal Periodical articles in legal journals such as New Jersey Law Journal, American Bar Association Barrister, New Jersey Lawyer, ABA Law Practice Management, and New Jersey State Bar Association's Dictum. Listed on www.njlaws.com.

KENNETH VERCAMMEN, ESQ.

RECENT SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS ON WILLS, ELDER LAW, AND PROBATE
East Brunswick Adult School 2009, 2008
Middlesex County Police Chiefs 2009- Living Wills
Middlesex County College- Wills & Probate 2007
Edison Adult School -Wills, Elder Law & Probate- 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002 [inc Edison TV], 2001, 2000,1999,1998,1997
- Nuts & Bolts of Elder Law - NJ Institute for Continuing Legal Education/ NJ State Bar ICLE/NJSBA 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2000, 1999, 1996
-Elder Law and Estate Planning- American Bar Association New York City 2008, Miami 2007
South Plainfield Seniors- New Probate Law 2005, East Brunswick Seniors- New Probate Law 2005
Old Bridge AARP 2002; Guardian Angeles/ Edison 2002; St. Cecilia/ Woodbridge Seniors 2002;
East Brunswick/ Hall's Corner 2002;
-Linden AARP 2002
-Woodbridge Adult School -Wills and Estate Administration -2001, 2000,1999,1998,1997,1996
Woodbridge Housing 2001; Metuchen Seniors & Metuchen TV 2001; Frigidare/ Local 401 Edison 2001; Chelsea/ East Brunswick 2001, Village Court/ Edison 2001; Old Bridge Rotary 2001; Sacred Heart/ South Amboy 2001; Livingston Manor/ New Brunswick 2001; Sunrise East Brunswick 2001; Strawberry Hill/ Woodbridge 2001;
-Wills and Elder Law - Metuchen Adult School 1999,1997,1996,1995,1994,1993
-Clara Barton Senior Citizens- Wills & Elder Law-Edison 2002, 1995
-AARP Participating Attorney in Legal Plan for NJ AARP members 1999-2005
-Senior Legal Points University of Medicine & Dentistry UMDNJ & St. Peter's-2000, 1999,1998
-East Brunswick AARP Wills 2001; -Iselin/ Woodbridge AARP Wills 2000
-Metuchen Reformed Church; Franklin/ Somerset/ Quailbrook Seniors 2001
-North Brunswick Senior Day 2001
-Wills, Elder Law and Probate-South Brunswick Adult School & Channel 28 TV 1999, 1997,1993
-Wills and Estate Planning-Old Bridge Adult School 1998,1997,1995
-Senior Citizen Law-Perth Amboy YMHA 1995; Temple Beth Or 2002;
-Wills, Living Wills and Probate-Spotswood Community School 1995,1994,1993
-Wills and Probate-Sayreville Adult School 1997, 1996,1995,1994
-Living Wills-New Jersey State Bar Foundation and St. Demetrius, Carteret 1994
-Wills and Estate Planning-Edison Elks and Senior Citizens January 1994
-"Legal Questions Clinic" Metuchen Adult School March 1995,1994,1993
-Estate Planning to Protect Families-Metuchen Chamber of Commerce April 1993

SPECIAL ACTING PROSECUTOR: Woodbridge, East Brunswick, Metuchen, South Brunswick, Perth Amboy, Cranbury, South Plainfield, Clark, South River, Hightstown, Carteret, Jamesburg, Berkeley Heights on conflict matters. Past President- Middlesex Municipal Prosecutor's Association. Previous experience with the Delaware County, Pennsylvania District Attorney Office, Middlesex County Probation Department and Scranton District Magistrate Office.

Metuchen Public Defender 2001- present Edison Public Defender 1990-1991

KENNETH VERCAMMEN- Community Service

NON- PROFIT: -Edison Elks-Presiding Justice 1993- Present
-Y.B. CHOI TAE KWON DO (Korean Karate)- 4th degree Black Belt awarded 2008 3rd degree 2004 ; 2nd degree December 1993, 1st degree Black Belt December 2001
-Raritan Valley Road Runners- Comeback of the Year Award 2002 and ranked Master Distance Runner; state champion 20,000 meter team 2005

New Jersey State Age Group Champion Garden State Games 5,000 meter run 1993
-Bishop Ahr/St. Thomas Aquinas H.S. Alumni Society
Elected Vice-President 1989-1990; Class of 1977- 25 year Reunion Chair
-Edison 14th District Committeeman Elected 1988-1994
-St. Francis Cathedral- Church Lector 1990-1994
-University of Scranton, North Jersey Alumni Chapter Co-Chair, Fall Social 1988
-Knights of Columbus-Fourth Degree Knight, Edison Council
Edison NJ Essay Contest Chair 1992,1993
Metuchen Chamber of Commerce, Past member Edison Chamber of Commerce;
RUNNING:
Raritan Valley Road Runners RVRR Rumson HashHouse Harriers
Central Jersey Road Runners CJRR Jersey Shore Triathlon Club JSTC
Freehold Area Running Club FARC Scranton Area Organization Runners SOAR
Jersey Shore Running Club JSRC USATF- US Athletic Track & Field
Sandy Hook Triathlon Club First Place- Bergen Bar 5k Law Day Run May 2001 South Brunswick Running Group- President First Place- CJRR Summer 5K 2002
First Place: Cocoa Beach 2 mile 2008, 2007; Cranford Run for Lupus 4 mile 2006, JSRC Twilight run 2006. Indian Trials Middletown 3m 2005,2004; Stroudsburg 5k 2005, 2004; Wildwood 5k, Ocean Winter 4 mile, Edison Lannie 5k, 2004; Washington DC Run for Justice 5K 2002
CJRR Age group champ 2005,2004, 2002, 1996, 1995
New York Marathon top 100 NJ Finisher

ACTIVITIES: Married 1989, one son born 1991, daughter born 1994
Weekend Road Running Races, Triathlons, Soccer
Tae Kwon Do Karate

SOUTH BRUNSWICK AREA
Summer Blast/Ireland Brook Neighborhood Sponsor
So. Brunswick Soccer Asst. Coach Travel 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 98
So. Brunswick Athletic Assoc.-Team Sponsor and helper with son's team
So. Brunswick Viking 5k- volunteer
South Brunswick 5K running Race volunteer
So. Brunswick Bicentennial Volunteer
Neighborhood Picnic Sponsor 1998-2009
So. Brunswick 50 Mile Bike Volunteer and 50 mile Finisher
Holt for Congress Volunteer

CHARITABLE: American Cancer Society-Chairman
Annual Summer Fundraiser Picnic- 1987,88,89,90,91,92
Chairman, Annual Christmas Fundraiser- 1987,88,89,90,911,92
Recipient-Young Professionals Award-Sept. 1988, Sept. 1989
Board of Manager's - 1989-1994 Founder and Chair-Young Professionals Group

KENNETH VERCAMMEN, ESQ. Education & Awards

LEGAL EDUCATION: The Widener/ Delaware Law School, J.D., May 1985
Class Rank: Top Ten Percent
Awards: Honor Grades: Federal Income Tax, Business Organization, Criminal Law, Advanced Advocacy, Family Law, New Jersey Practice, Unfair Trade Practices, Professional Liability.
Outstanding Service Award Recipient in Graduation Ceremony
Delaware Merit Scholarship - 1983, 1984
Provincial Winner - Phi Delta Phi Legal Honor Fraternity Graduate of the Year Award
Who's Who in American Law Schools

ACTIVITIES:
Law Review- Senior Staff-Member
Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Senior Editor 1984-1985
Winner - Sixth Annual Trial Advocacy Competition
First Prize - Delaware Law School/ATLA Environmental Law Essay Contest
Delaware Law Forum, Casenote Editor

Working Scholar- Hon. Philip Gruccio, Assignment Judge of Atlantic, Cumberland, Cape May, Salem Counties
Association of Trial Lawyers of America, Delaware Chapter Treasurer
Law School Running Club - President
Research Assistant - Dean Arthur Weeks
Publications- Published in Law Review and wrote more articles than 75% of law faculty members

PRELEGAL EDUCATION: University of Scranton B.S., January 1981
Major: Political Science: Graduated Cum Laude in 3-1/2 years
Honors:
- Cited in Who's Who in American Colleges and Universities;
- Dean's List; Pi Gamma Mu Honor Society; Pi Sigma Alpha Honor Society.
- Varsity Cross- Country - Team Captain and Record Holder of Indoor Half-Mile
- District Magistrate Thomas Hart- Paid Law Clerk/ Executive Assistant
- Pre-Law Society Public Relations Director
- Voter Registration Drive Coordinator
- Internship with Pa. Representative Hon. Fred Belardi
- School Newspaper Staff and Sportswriter
- WYRE radio station sports caster
- 3rd Place Wrestling Tournament
- Campus Bowl Intellectual Competition (Team Captain)
- Trustee Day Volunteer, Red Cross Blood Drive Volunteer
- Senior Class - Hard Rockers Social Committee Chair
-Alumni Society-Estate Planning Council 1997-Present
- Class of 1981 20 year Reunion Executive Committee member 2001 -25 Year Reunion Co-chair


KENNETH VERCAMMEN
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500
The American Bar Association is the largest voluntary professional organization in the world with more than 400,000 members

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION - National Appointments:

General Practice Solo & Small Firm Division
-Estate Planning, Probate & Trust Committee- Chair 2008-2009, 2006-2007
-Elder Law Committee Chair 2005- present, Vice Chair 1996-1999
- Criminal Law Committee Deputy Chair 2006-present
- Tort, Personal Injury and Insurance Committee Chair 2005- 2006
-Deputy Chair and Newsletter Editor-GP Marketing Legal Services Committee 1993 -1996
- Probate & Estate Planning Committee- Newsletter Editor & Vice Chair 1997-1999, Vice Chair 2005
-Litigation Committee Member 1993 - present

BUSINESS AND AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS:
-Elder Law, Estate and Probate ABA Chicago Annual Meeting
-Elder Law and Probate New York City 2008 Annual Meeting
- Improving Your Elder Law & Estate Practice San Francisco, CA 2007
-Elder Law and Estate Planning- ABA Miami 2007
-Elder Law Practice, New Ethical Ideas to Improve Your Practice for Clients ABA Hawaii 2006
-Marketing Success Stories ABA Toronto 1998
-Opening a Business-Sayreville Adult School 1997,1996,1995
-Olympians of Marketing- ABA Annual Meeting-Orlando, Florida 1996
-Unique Marketing Techniques & Client Relations III ABA Annual Meeting-Chicago 1995
-Starting a Business-Brooklyn Bar Association 1995,1994
-Personal Marketing & Relations - 1995 Miami ABA meeting LPM Personal Marketing Skills IG
co-sponsored by four Major National Bar Sections and committees
-How to Start a Practice-1994 New Orleans ABA Annual Meeting LPM primary sponsor
-1993 New York Annual Meeting "Marketing for Small Firms"

LAW PRACTICE MANAGEMENT SECTION ABA- LPM
-Co-Chair with Jay Foonberg-ABA LPM Personal Marketing Skills Group 1998,1997,1996,1995,1994
-Speaker at many ABA Annual Meetings
-National Liaison and ex-officio member of Law Practice Management Section Council 1993 - 1995
-National Chair - Law Practice Management Committee YLD 1992-1993
-Chair and Newsletter Editor-Marketing Legal Services Committee 1996-1997,1999-2000
ABA Attendance at Leadership Conferences and participation at following Annual and Sectional meetings: Chicago 2009, New York 2008, Philadelphia GP 2007, San Francisco 2007, Washington GP 2007, Miami 2007, Hawaii 2006, Philadelphia LPM 2005; Washington DC 2002; Philadelphia 2002; London 2000, New York 2000, Atlanta 1999, Beverly Hills 1999, Cancun LPM 1998, Naples-LPM 1997; Captiva 1996, Orlando 1996, Coronado LPM 1995, Chicago 1995, Miami 1995, Washington D.C. GP 1995, Vancouver LPM 1995, New Orleans 1995, Napa, CA LPM 1994, Colorado LPM 1993, New York 1993, Boston 1993, San Francisco 1992, Cleveland GP 1992, Scottsdale AZ 1991, Los Angeles 1990, Hawaii 1989, Philadelphia 1988, Toronto 1988, New York City 1986, Washington DC 1985


KENNETH VERCAMMEN
Attorney at Law
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
732-572-0500
New Jersey State Bar Association- Municipal Court Section Chair 2003-2004, Vice Chair 1999-2002; Chair of Municipal Court Education Committee 1996-Present
Middlesex County Bar Association Chair Municipal Court Practice Committee 1997-2008
County Bar Board of Trustees 2000- 2006

New Jersey State Bar Association -General Practice Section-Board of Directors 1995- Present

ADJUNCT PROFESSOR Middlesex County College
Edison, NJ February, 2001-April, 2001; Jan. 1990-May, 1991
Instructor of "Criminal Law and Procedure" and Business Law. Taught college students the elements of crime and the criminal procedure system. Explained the incidents before and after trial and analyzed the impact of the Constitution on crimes and criminal procedures.

New Jersey Superior Court - Certified Mediator 1997-

New Jersey Supreme Court Committee on Municipal Courts 2000-2005

Other Speaking
-Update of Municipal Court-NJSBA Annual Meeting Atlantic City 1999,1997, 95, 94
- Cranbury Twp Municipal Alliance Against Substance Abuse 2004, 2002
-ATLA-NJ - New Jersey Courts 1991
-Intoxicated Driver Resource Center/IDRC - DUI Law 1999, 1991
-Preventing the Impaired Driver-Coalition Against Impaired Drivers 1992
-Winning Lawsuit Threshold Cases NJSBA 1992
-WCTC Radio Mid-Day Legal Advisor - Criminal and Traffic Laws 1991 and 1990
-Computers in Litigation-NJSBA Law Office Management 1994
-Self Defense Law in New Jersey - Cranbury Police Dept. 1997,1993,1992

Self Defense and Home Protection - Speaker - New Brunswick Crime Watch - 1989
-Wills and Power of Attorney 1991 Edison Democratic Association
Defending Speeding Cases - New Jersey State Bar Association/NJSBA - 1989
-Family Law & Domestic Violence Trial Practice NJ State Bar Association 1995,1994,1993
-Automobile Insurance - Middlesex County College - 1990
-Criminal & Juvenile Courts Piscataway Vo Tech – 1990
-Living Wills-Dean Witter and Nordstroms, Menlo Park Mall October 1992; Trusts and Living Wills-Dean Witter, Metro Park, June 1992; Estate Planning-North Brunswick Republican Club May 1992;

Make a Wish Foundation- Co Chair 19th Annual Summer Blast 1994 in Belmar, NJ
Co Chair Christmas Fundraiser 1993
Jersey Shore Medical Center Chair-18th Annual Summer Blast to Benefit the Jersey Shore Regional
Trauma Center at Bar Anticipation, Belmar 1993
American Red Cross Elected to Board of Directors 1988-1991

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

VOLUNTEER EDITOR- WANTED - To serve as Assistant Editor of American Bar Association Elder Law Newsletter for the ABA GP Solo Division

VOLUNTEER EDITOR- WANTED -
To serve as Assistant Editor of American Bar Association Elder Law Newsletter for the ABA GP Solo Division
and
Assistant Editor of the
NJ Municipal Court Law Review
Good for new lawyer and recent law grad who wants to improve their resume and networking skills who is between jobs.
Duties
- Review and Revise Legal and Consumer Law Articles for Grammar and Punctuation
- add articles to legal blogs and ABA newsletter distributor
- Work as Assistant Editor of the New Jersey Municipal Court Law Review
- Provide copies of published newsletters to Judges, Prosecutors and other New Jersey professionals
- Submit articles to websites and New Jersey Media with your name as Assistant Editor
- Type Rough Draft Articles
- Gain some legal and publication experience
- Part-time volunteer, 6 hours per week required in office
Editor Kenneth A. Vercammen, Esq.
Author of 125 Legal Articles
Send resume and cover letter to:
Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.
2053 Woodbridge Avenue
Edison, NJ 08817
Phone 732-572-0500
Fax: 732-572-0030
Website: www.njlaws.com

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

17:28-1. Separate risks and premiums; exceptions

17:28-1. Separate risks and premiums; exceptions
When a policy shall insure against more than one hazard or peril, the insurance against any specific hazard or peril shall not be separately cancelable unless the policy shall specify a separate premium for any such insurance so cancelable. No policy of life or endowment insurance or annuity contract authorized pursuant to paragraph "c" of section 17:17-1 of this Title shall assume any hazard or peril specified in any other paragraph of said section 17:17-1 except insurance against bodily injury or death by accident and upon the health of persons as specified in paragraph "d" of the said section. Any policy of liability insurance authorized by paragraphs "d" or "e" of said section 17:17-1 may contain a provision for payment on behalf of the injured party or for reimbursement of the assured for payment of medical, hospital, surgical and funeral expenses incurred, as a result of an accident, irrespective of legal liability of the assured, and an automobile liability policy may also contain a provision for payment of disability benefits to persons who are injured and death benefits to dependents, beneficiaries or personal representatives of persons who are killed if such injury or death is caused by accident and sustained while in or upon, entering or alighting from, or through being struck by an automobile, irrespective of legal liability of the assured, and such provisions shall not be deemed to be an accident insurance policy. The commissioner may order the discontinuance of any provision in a policy of automobile liability insurance providing for such disability or death benefits which he finds to be unjust, unfair, inequitable, misleading or contrary to law. Any policy of automobile liability insurance may also contain a provision for payment of part or all sums which the insured or his legal representative shall be legally entitled to recover as damages from the operator or owner of an uninsured automobile because of bodily injury, sickness or disease, including death resulting therefrom, or because of damage to property, sustained by the insured, caused by accident and arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of such uninsured automobile.

39:6A-9.1 Recovery from tortfeasor.

39:6A-9.1 Recovery from tortfeasor.

20. An insurer, health maintenance organization or governmental agency paying benefits pursuant to subsection a., b. or d. of section 13 of P.L.1983, c.362 (C.39:6A-4.3), personal injury protection benefits in accordance with section 4 or section 10 of P.L.1972, c.70 (C.39:6A-4 or 39:6A-10), medical expense benefits pursuant to section 4 of P.L.1998, c.21 (C.39:6A-3.1) or benefits pursuant to section 45 of P.L.2003, c.89 (C.39:6A-3.3), as a result of an accident occurring within this State, shall, within two years of the filing of the claim, have the right to recover the amount of payments from any tortfeasor who was not, at the time of the accident, required to maintain personal injury protection or medical expense benefits coverage, other than for pedestrians, under the laws of this State, including personal injury protection coverage required to be provided in accordance with section 18 of P.L.1985, c.520 (C.17:28-1.4), or although required did not maintain personal injury protection or medical expense benefits coverage at the time of the accident. In the case of an accident occurring in this State involving an insured tortfeasor, the determination as to whether an insurer, health maintenance organization or governmental agency is legally entitled to recover the amount of payments and the amount of recovery, including the costs of processing benefit claims and enforcing rights granted under this section, shall be made against the insurer of the tortfeasor, and shall be by agreement of the involved parties or, upon failing to agree, by arbitration.

Monday, November 2, 2009

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Bonhampton Edison Middlesex County 08837

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Bonhampton Edison Middlesex County 08837
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Bodine, North Brunswick Middlesex County 08902

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Bodine, North Brunswick Middlesex County 08902
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Black Horse, North Brunswick Middlesex County 08902

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Black Horse, North Brunswick Middlesex County 08902
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Berdines Corner North Brunswick Middlesex County 08902

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Berdines Corner North Brunswick Middlesex County 08902
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Barber Middlesex County 0

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Barber Middlesex County 08861
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Avon Park, 07080 SOUTH PLAINFIELD Middlesex County

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Avon Park, 07080 SOUTH PLAINFIELD Middlesex County
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Avenel Woodbridge Middlesex County 07001

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Avenel Woodbridge Middlesex County 07001
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Arbor, Piscataway Middlesex County 08854

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Arbor, Piscataway Middlesex County 08854
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Aqueduct Plainsboro Middlesex County 08536

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Aqueduct Plainsboro Middlesex County 08536
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Applegarth, Monroe, Middlesex County 08831

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Applegarth, Monroe, Middlesex County 08831
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Adams Station, Middlesex County 0890

Helping Persons Injured in Accidents in Adams Station, Middlesex County 08902
Have you been injured in an accident in this area? You may be entitled to damages from the insurance company of the negligent party. We help injured persons so they don’t get the run around by the insurance company.
Who has not had problems in the past with insurance companies failing to pay bills or losing your paperwork? We also help clients fill out the insurance applications to require insurance company to pay medical bills. Call Kenneth Vercammen’s office to schedule a confidential consult.
If injured, to do…….
1. Witnesses will be a tremendous help to you in any subsequent court action, if there is any question of liability involved. Get the names and addresses of as many witnesses as possible. If they refuse to identify themselves, jot down the license plate numbers of the their automobiles. Do not discuss the accident with the witnesses. Do not give the witnesses to anyone but the police, your attorney or your insurance company.
2. Do not assign or accept blame for the accident.
- The scene of the accident is not the place to determine fault. Discuss the accident only with the police, your attorney and with representatives of your insurance company. Give the other party only your drivers license number, registration number and insurance information. Be cooperative with the police.
3. Seek hospital attention.
5 . Seek medical treatment and physical therapy from a Doctor after released from hospital
6. Call your insurance company to report the accident.
7. Call: Kenneth A. Vercammen, Attorney At Law (732) 572-0500
When you need help the most, we will be ready to help you.
8. Obtain a copy of the police report to make sure all information is correct. Never give a signed statement to the claims adjuster representing the other driver's insurance company. The same goes for a phone recording. They may be used against you in court.
Fighting Insurance Companies
To do by attorney
- Send Claim letter to defendant insurance company
- Review hospital and medical records
- File Complaint
- Answer Interrogatories
- Handle depositions
- Obtain expert reports
- Prepare Arbitration statement
- Attend Arbitration
- Prepare for Trial
More information at Helping Injured Persons Screwed by Insurance Companies http://www.njlaws.com/helping_injured_persons_screwed_by_insurance_co.htm

Sunday, January 25, 2009

Mazzacano v.Happy Hour Social and Athletic Club of Maple Shade, Inc. (A-102-07)

SYLLABUS

(This syllabus is not part of the opinion of the Court. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the
convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Supreme Court. Please note that, in the
interests of brevity, portions of any opinion may not have been summarized).

Mazzacano v.Happy Hour Social and Athletic Club of Maple Shade, Inc. (A-102-07)

Argued October 6, 2008 -- Decided January 22, 2009

ALBIN, J., writing for a unanimous Court.

The Court considers whether a licensed alcoholic beverage server can be held liable for civil wrongful death
under the New Jersey Licensed Alcoholic Beverage Server Fair Liability Act (Dram Shop Act or Act), N.J.S.A.
2A:22A-1 to -7, for failing to monitor a patron who became intoxicated at a party where the patrons served
themselves alcohol.

Defendant Happy Hour Social and Athletic Club of Maple Shade, Inc. (the Club) is a non-profit organization
formed for the purpose of helping community children. The New Jersey Division of Alcohol Beverage Control
issued to the Club a limited social-affair permit to dispense alcohol at its yearly picnic to benefit community athletic
teams. Guests were able to serve themselves beer from a tap in a specially-provisioned truck for the occasion. No
one was assigned by the Club to stand by the beer truck to determine whether a patron was intoxicated. After the
party, one of the guests, while driving three other guests to a bar, lost control of his car, causing the deaths of all
four. An autopsy of the driver revealed that his blood alcohol content was almost twice the legal limit.

At a civil wrongful death trial brought under the Dram Shop Act, multiple witnesses testified that the driver did
not appear intoxicated. The plaintiff’s toxicology expert conceded that a very small percentage of people might not
seem visibly intoxicated at the level recorded for the driver. Before the jury deliberated, it was instructed on the
applicable law under the Dram Shop Act. The trial court charged the jury that the Club was negligent if it provided,
served or allowed to be provided alcoholic beverages to a visibly-intoxicated person. In response to a question by
the jury during its deliberations whether the Club had the responsibility to monitor alcohol consumption, the court
reminded the jury that if it found the Club “allowed” the driver to consume alcohol when he was visibly intoxicated,
it must find the Club negligent. The jury found that the Club did not negligently provide alcoholic beverages to the
driver when he was visibly intoxicated. The trial court denied a motion for a new trial by the plaintiff, finding no
basis to reverse its prior legal rulings and finding further that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence.
A two-judge majority of the Appellate Division panel affirmed in an unpublished decision. In a dissenting
opinion, the third panel member asserted that in cases involving the self-service of alcohol, the Dram Shop Act had
an “evident gap” that the court should fill. In his view, the jury should have been instructed that the Club had a
responsibility to monitor alcohol consumption and, if it found the Club failed to meet that responsibility, the jury
should have been instructed that it was free to infer that the driver served himself alcohol while he was visibly
intoxicated.

To decide the appeal-as-of-right arising from the dissent in the Appellate Division, the Supreme Court considered
whether the trial court erred by not instructing the jury that a licensed alcoholic beverage server could be liable
under the Dram Shop Act for failing to monitor patrons for intoxication at parties involving the self-service of
alcohol.

HELD: The New Jersey Licensed Alcoholic Beverage Server Fair Liability Act permits a finding of liability when
a licensed alcoholic beverage server allows a patron to become visibly intoxicated through the self-service of
alcohol at a party. However, the Act does not impose a separate duty to monitor alcohol ingestion or define
negligence as the failure to monitor, and the Court declines to impose a monitoring duty that is not set forth in the
Act. In this civil action arising from the deaths of party-attendees who were riding in a car driven by another
attendee who became intoxicated at the party through the self-service of alcohol, there was sufficient evidence in the
record to support the jury’s verdict that the server did not negligently provide alcohol to the driver when he was
visibly intoxicated.

2
1. The Dram Shop Act is the exclusive remedy for personal injury or property damage resulting from the negligent
service of alcoholic beverages by a licensed alcoholic beverage server. Under the Act, a licensed alcoholic beverage
server can be held liable only if (1) the server is deemed negligent; (2) the injury or damage was proximately caused
by the negligent service; and (3) the injury or damage was a foreseeable consequence of the negligent service. Also
under the Act, a licensed alcoholic beverage server is negligent only when the server served a visibly intoxicated
person or served a minor. (Pp. 15-16).

2. The Club does not deny that the self-service of alcohol constituted service of alcohol under the Dram Shop Act,
and the trial court correctly instructed the jurors that if the Club “allowed” the driver to consume alcoholic
beverages when he was visibly intoxicated, it must find the Club negligent. The Legislature did not intend that a
licensed alcoholic beverage server would benefit from willful blindness by hosting a party that permits the self-
service of alcohol. A licensed server that places at the disposal of its patrons a beer truck for the self-service of
alcohol is serving alcohol within the intendment of the Act. If a licensed server serves alcohol in this manner to a
visibly-intoxicated person, it is acting negligently and is exposed to civil liability. Because this exposure to liability
can result in economic ruin from a lawsuit and the inability to secure insurance in the future, a licensed server has a
strong economic incentive to monitor the condition of persons served alcohol. (Pp. 16-18).

3. This case centers on one question—whether the driver was allowed to serve himself alcohol while visibly
intoxicated. If anyone had observed the driver visibly intoxicated before he left the Club’s grounds, the jury would
have been free to infer that the Club had allowed him to drink while intoxicated. No one who observed the driver
during the picnic, however, was of the opinion that he met the Dram Shop Act’s definition of visibly intoxicated.
Although plaintiff’s toxicologist relied on statistical evidence that most people possessing a blood alcohol content
identical to the driver’s would have shown signs of intoxication, he indicated that not all will do so. It was the jury’s
task to decide what weight to give to the testimony of the witnesses and the expert. Ultimately the jury determined
that the Club did not negligently provide alcoholic beverages to the driver when he was visibly intoxicated. The
Court concludes that there was sufficient evidence in the record to support that verdict. (Pp. 18-19).

4. With regard to the conclusions of the dissenting Appellate Division judge, the Legislature clearly signaled that
the Dram Shop Act is the exclusive civil remedy for the negligent service of alcoholic beverages by a licensed
alcoholic beverage server. The Act’s language strongly suggests that the Legislature did not want our courts adding
civil remedies through either the common law or creative statutory construction not found in the Act itself. The
Court cannot and should not rewrite a plainly written enactment of the Legislature or write in an additional
qualification that the Legislature pointedly omitted. The Court declines to adopt the dissenting judge’s approach,
which would create a judicial standard not intended by those who wrote and enacted the Act. (Pp. 20-23).

5. In summary, the Dram Shop Act permits a finding of liability when an establishment allows a patron to become
visibly intoxicated through the self-service of alcohol at a party. For that reason alone, a licensed alcoholic beverage
server has a compelling economic interest to monitor the intake of alcohol. The Club did not benefit from the
absence of monitors; rather it unnecessarily exposed itself to a potentially staggering liability award. However, the
Act does not impose a separate duty to monitor alcohol ingestion. Nor does it define negligence, which is the only
available cause of action in the Act, as the failure to monitor. Rather, as specifically stated in the Act, a licensed
alcoholic beverage server is negligent only when the server served a visibly intoxicated person or served a minor.
The Legislature is free to enact higher standards, such as a duty to monitor, than those presently found in our
statutes. (Pp. 23-24).

The judgment of the Appellate Division is AFFIRMED.

CHIEF JUSTICE RABNER and JUSTICES LONG, LaVECCHIA, WALLACE, RIVERA-SOTO and
HOENS join in JUSTICE ALBIN’s opinion.

SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY
A-102 September Term 2007


DIANE M. MAZZACANO,
Administratrix ad
Prosequendum and General
Administratrix of the Estate
of STEPHEN N. MIKALIC,
Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

THE ESTATE OF JOHN A.
KINNERMAN, Deceased, RITCHIE
& PAGE, DISTRIBUTING CO.,
INC., ANHEUSER-BUSCH, INC.,
STEPHEN JOHN KANICKIJ, JOHN
DOE and JANE DOE, Fictitious
Individuals,

Defendants,

and

HAPPY HOUR SOCIAL AND
ATHLETIC CLUB OF MAPLE SHADE,
INC.,

Defendant-Respondent.


Argued October 6, 2008 – Decided January 22, 2009

On appeal from the Superior Court, Appellate
Division.

Kenneth D. McPherson, Jr., argued the cause
for appellant (Waters, McPherson, McNeill,
attorneys; Mr. McPherson, Eric D. McCullough
and Robert S. Lipschitz, on the brief).

Terrence J. Bolan argued the cause for
respondent (Bolan Jahnsen Reardon,
2
attorneys; Elizabeth A. Wilson, on the
brief).


JUSTICE ALBIN delivered the opinion of the Court.
In this case, defendant Happy Hour Social and Athletic Club
of Maple Shade, Inc. (Happy Hour Social and Athletic Club or the
Club) was issued a limited permit to dispense alcohol at its
yearly “Pig Roast” picnic. Guests were able to serve themselves
beer from a tap in a specially-provisioned truck for the
occasion. At the end of the picnic, one of the guests, while
driving three others to a sports bar, lost control of his car,
causing the deaths of all four. At a civil wrongful death trial
brought under the New Jersey Licensed Alcoholic Beverage Server
Fair Liability Act (Dram Shop Act), N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-1 to -7, a
jury found the Club not liable for the accident, apparently
because the driver of the doomed vehicle did not appear to be
visibly intoxicated when he left the picnic.
The trial court had charged the jury that if the Club
allowed the service of alcohol to a visibly-intoxicated person,
then liability would follow, provided that the service of the
alcohol was the proximate cause of the victims’ injuries and
deaths. The trial court rejected the theory that the Club had
an independent duty under the Dram Shop Act to monitor the
guests serving themselves beer and that the failure to do so,
standing alone, could be the basis for liability. A divided
3
appellate panel affirmed the trial court’s rulings and the jury
verdict.
A dissenting panel member concluded that the Club had a
duty to monitor its guests and, because of the absence of such
monitoring, the trial judge should have charged the jury that it
was free to infer that the driver of the vehicle served himself
while visibly intoxicated. Because the Dram Shop Act is the
“exclusive civil remedy for personal injury . . . resulting from
the negligent service of alcoholic beverages,” N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-
4, we reject the dissenter’s invitation to impose a judicially-
created monitoring duty that is not set forth in that statute.
We affirm the appellate panel, but emphasize that the Dram Shop
Act provides a powerful incentive to a social club to monitor
its guests at an affair, because if such a club allows the self-
service of alcohol to a visibly-intoxicated guest or patron who
then causes an automobile accident proximately related to his
intoxicated condition, it can be held accountable under the Act.

I.
A.
Defendant Happy Hour Social and Athletic Club is a non-
profit organization, which was formed for the purpose of
“help[ing] community kids.” The Club has approximately 115
members, all male, and owns a building equipped with a private
4
bar, resting on 5.4 acres of land in Maple Shade. The Club
holds a liquor license.
In keeping with an annual tradition, on August 17, 2002,
the Club hosted an outdoor “Pig Roast” on its property, with the
proceeds to benefit community athletic teams. The event was
open to the general public at a charge of twenty dollars per
person. Both food and beverages, including beer, were available
at the picnic.
The Club arranged for beer to be supplied by Ritchie & Page
Distributing Co., Inc. (Ritchie & Page), a licensed, New Jersey
wholesaler of beer products manufactured by Anheuser-Busch, Inc.
At the picnic, Ritchie & Page provided a refrigerated “beer
truck,” which contained five half-sized kegs with three taps
located outside the vehicle. In advance of the Pig Roast, the
Club also obtained from the New Jersey Division of Alcohol
Beverage Control a “social affair permit” that allowed for the
service of alcohol at the event.1 In its application for the
permit, the Club submitted a sketch of a “beer truck” and two

1
A social affair permit “authorize[s] the sale of alcoholic
beverages by the glass or other open receptacle by civic,
religious, educational, veterans or other qualified
organizations . . . notwithstanding that the sale of alcoholic
beverages has otherwise been prohibited by [statute] or
municipal ordinance or resolution.” N.J.S.A. 33:1-74(c)
(citations omitted); see also N.J.A.C. 13:2-5.1. The fee for
such a permit is statutorily set. N.J.S.A. 33:1-74(a). The
Maple Shade municipal clerk’s office approved the Club’s
application for the permit.

5
stick figures next to the truck, accompanied by a handwritten
notation: “two club members checking IDs.”2
Approximately 175 people, including children, attended the
Pig Roast, which began at 1:00 p.m. Stephen John Kanickij, an
employee of Ritchie & Page, drove the “beer truck” to the event
and made “sure everything [was] running properly.” Beer was
available on a self-serve basis from taps outside of the truck.
Kanickij did not believe that he had any responsibility to
monitor the intake of alcohol by those attending the Pig Roast.
The Club’s president, Robert Wojahowski, did not assign club
members to stand by the beer truck to check identification or to
determine if a patron was visibly intoxicated. Nor did the Club
hire police officers or private security guards to monitor
alcohol consumption. In the past, if a guest “got out of hand,”
Wojahowski would simply call the police.
John A. Kinnerman, age 34, arrived at the picnic at
approximately 1:00 p.m. Over the next five hours, Kinnerman was
observed at least once at the beer truck, but no one remembered
him drinking alcohol. By various accounts, from the time of his
arrival at the party until he departed at approximately 6:40

2
The permit limited the service of alcohol at the event to the
hours of 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. and prohibited the Club from
allowing the service or consumption of alcohol “directly or
indirectly” to “any person . . . who is actually or apparently
intoxicated.”

6
p.m., Kinnerman did not appear to be visibly intoxicated.
William Natale, who observed Kinnerman at 3:00 p.m., found
nothing about Kinnerman’s appearance suggesting intoxication.
Kinnerman’s mother last saw him at 5:20 p.m. and did not
consider him to be under the influence. Last, Kevin Jacoby
witnessed Kinnerman leave the party and enter his car and, in
his estimation, Kinnerman did not appear intoxicated.
Kinnerman left the Pig Roast with three other people who
attended the party, their destination a local sports bar.
Stephen N. Mikalic, age 45, an investigator at the Camden County
Prosecutor’s Office, Michael McMullen, and John Meloni took
passenger seats in Kinnerman’s 1971 Ford Mustang, which was
equipped with racing tires.3 Kinnerman, who was an experienced,
high-performance driver with a reputation for racing through
Maple Shade at speeds in excess of 100 miles per hour, got
behind the wheel. Kinnerman raced the Mustang, accelerating to
a speed of ninety miles per hour. About a quarter mile from the
picnic site, he lost control of the car, which crossed over the
center divider. Kinnerman’s car hit a van traveling in the
opposite direction, and then flipped over. All four men in the
Mustang were killed, and the driver of the van was seriously
injured.

3
The car was also described as a “1971 Ford Mach.”
7
An autopsy later revealed that Kinnerman’s blood alcohol
content (BAC) was 0.181 percent at the time of his death, almost
twice as high as the then-permissible BAC limit in 2002 under
N.J.S.A. 39:4-50. See L. 2001, c. 12, § 1.4 By contrast,
Mikalic’s BAC was 0.085 percent, a level below the then
legislatively defined BAC limit.
At trial, David Pandina, Ph.D., a toxicology expert,
testified that Kinnerman “was certainly under the influence of
alcohol” at the time of the accident. Pandina concluded that
Kinnerman’s 0.181 BAC reading indicated that he had consumed the
equivalent of thirteen twelve-ounce glasses of beer over a
period of four-and-one-half hours or nine twelve-ounce glasses
within an hour of the accident. Pandina formed an opinion,
within a reasonable degree of probability, that Kinnerman was
“visibly intoxicated” at the party. Pandina reached that
hypothesis based on studies that at a 0.15 BAC “the vast
majority of people will show signs and symptoms” of
intoxication. He conceded, however, that even at that BAC level
“a very small percentage” would not appear visibly intoxicated,

4
In 2002, at the time of the accident, the legal BAC limit for
operating a motor vehicle in New Jersey was 0.10 percent. See
L. 2001, c. 12, § 1. The legal level of intoxication was
lowered in 2004 to 0.08 percent. See L. 2003, c. 314 (codified
at N.J.S.A. 39:4-50).

8
and that it was possible that some people with a 0.20 BAC level
might not “seem visibly intoxicated.”

B.
The victims’ families as well as the injured driver of the
van instituted civil actions against Kinnerman’s estate, the
Happy Hour Social and Athletic Club and other parties as a
result of the tragic accident. This appeal involves only the
amended wrongful death and survival action filed by plaintiff
Diane M. Mazzacano, the widow of Stephen N. Mikalic, against
Kinnerman’s estate, the Club, Anheuser-Busch, Inc., Ritchie &
Page, and its employee, Kanickij. Plaintiff’s complaint sought
damages against Kinnerman’s estate based on Kinnerman’s
negligent operation of his car and damages against the Club,
Ritchie & Page, Kanickij, and Anheuser-Bush based on the
negligent service of alcohol to Kinnerman in violation of the
Dram Shop Act. At the pre-trial stage, Anheuser-Busch was
dismissed from the case, and plaintiff settled with Kinnerman’s
estate.
The case proceeded to trial before a jury against the
remaining defendants. At the conclusion of plaintiff’s
presentation, the court dismissed Ritchie & Page and Kanickij
from the case on the ground that the beer distributor was merely
a “middleman delivering [a] product” and, in that capacity, had
9
no statutory or common law duty to monitor the consumption of
beer at the party. Thus, the Happy Hour Social and Athletic
Club was left as the sole defendant.
Although the court allowed considerable testimony
concerning the social affair permit, it did not grant
plaintiff’s request that the permit itself be introduced into
evidence. The court ruled so because the language on the
permit, which prohibited service of alcohol “to any person who
is actually or apparently intoxicated,” differed from the
negligence standard under the Dram Shop Act, which makes the
server of alcohol liable only when “the server served a visibly
intoxicated person, or served a minor.” N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-5(b).
Before it deliberated, the jury was instructed on the
applicable law under the Dram Shop Act. The court advised the
jury:
If you find that the Happy Hour Social &
Athletic Club of Maple Shade provided,
served, or allowed to be provided alcoholic
beverages to a person when that person was
visibly intoxicated, then you must find that
the [Club] was negligent. If you find that
the [Club] did not serve or allow or provide
alcoholic beverages to a visibly intoxicated
person, then it was not negligent.

[(Emphasis added).]

The court defined “visibly intoxicated” as “a state of
intoxication accompanied by a perceptible act or series of acts
10
which present clear signs of intoxication,” and instructed the
jury on proximate cause.
During its deliberations, the jury posed the following
question to the court: “As per obtained permit, does the club
have the responsibility to monitor alcohol consumption?” The
court responded that the permit was not in evidence, and
recharged the jury on the law under the Dram Shop Act. In
particular, the court reminded the jury that “[i]f you find that
the Happy Hour Social & Athletic Club of Maple Shade allowed Mr.
Kinnerman to consume alcoholic beverages when he was visibly
intoxicated, then you must find the [Club] was negligent.” The
jury, by a vote of seven to one, returned a verdict in favor of
the Club, finding that it did not “negligently provide alcoholic
beverages to [Kinnerman] while [he] was visibly intoxicated.”5
The court then entered judgment dismissing the cause of action
against the Club. The court denied plaintiff’s motion for a new
trial, finding no basis to reverse its prior legal rulings and
finding that the verdict was not against the weight of the
evidence.

C.

5
Because of this finding, there was no need for the jury to
address any of the remaining interrogatories dealing with
proximate cause and damages.
11
In an unpublished opinion, a divided appellate panel
affirmed. First, the panel (two-judge majority) acknowledged
that, based on the evidence, the jury was free to conclude, from
the absence of servers at the Pig Roast, that “Kinnerman’s
intoxication, if visible, would more likely have gone
unobserved.” Indeed, the panel noted that the Club did not
argue that “if Kinnerman was visibly intoxicated [it] could
escape liability because there were no servers to observe his
condition.” It noted that the parties did not dispute the
standard for liability under the Dram Shop Act, both agreeing
that “the Club would be liable if Kinnerman obtained alcohol
while visibly intoxicated.” The panel, however, rejected the
dissent’s suggestion that the Act imposed an obligation on the
trial court to “instruct the jury about a separate duty to
monitor consumption.” The Legislature spoke clearly, according
to the panel, that the only basis for liability under the Dram
Shop Act is if a guest or patron is provided alcohol when
“‘visibly intoxicated.’”
Second, the panel concluded that the verdict was not
against the weight of the evidence. It emphasized that several
persons attending the Pig Roast did not observe any sign that
Kinnerman was intoxicated; that “[t]here was some testimony that
Kinnerman could drink without showing signs of intoxication”;
and that the three victim passengers, who “apparently” were not
12
intoxicated, got into the car with Kinnerman. The jury, the
panel held, was free to accept that evidence and other
supportive inferences.
Last, the panel recognized that “because the jury found
Kinnerman was not visibly intoxicated,” there was no basis to
infer liability against Ritchie & Page and therefore no need to
consider whether, under other circumstances, Ritchie & Page,
which was “not licensed to serve alcoholic beverages,” could be
held liable under the Dram Shop Act.
The dissenting judge believed that in cases involving the
self-service of alcohol, such as the present one, the Dram Shop
Act had an “evident gap,” which the court “can and should fill.”
Although the dissenter found it commendable that the trial court
advised the jury that it could hold the Club liable if the Club
“‘allowed to be provided alcoholic beverages to a visibly
intoxicated person,’” he still concluded that the Club should
not “escape liability by having no one in place through whom to
impute the requisite knowledge of visible intoxication.” In his
view, the trial court had the obligation to “instruct[] the jury
that [the Club] did indeed have a ‘responsibility to monitor
alcoholic consumption.’” That duty, according to the dissenter,
“is entirely consistent with . . . the legislative objectives
reflected in the Act.” In his opinion, “if the jury found that
[the Club] had failed to meet its responsibility, the jury
13
should have been instructed that it was free to infer that
Kinnerman’s intoxication could have been observed if the alcohol
consumption had been properly monitored.”6 Last, the dissenter
would have decided that Ritchie & Page was not subject to the
Dram Shop Act because it was not a licensed server and because
it had no common law duty to monitor alcohol consumption at the
picnic.
Based on the dissent in the Appellate Division, plaintiff
filed an appeal as of right. R. 2:2-1(a)(2); see Gilborges v.
Wallace, 78 N.J. 342, 349 (1978) (“[T]he scope of the appeal . .
. is limited to those issues encompassed by the dissent.”). We
denied plaintiff’s petition for certification, declining to
review the appellate panel’s holding that Ritchie & Page was not
liable under common law negligence principles. Mazzacano v.
Happy Hour Social & Athletic Club of Maple Shade, Inc., 194 N.J.
267 (2008). Therefore, the only issue before this Court is
whether the trial court erred in not instructing the jury that a
licensed alcoholic beverage server could be held liable under
the Dram Shop Act for failing to monitor a patron who becomes
intoxicated at a party involving the self-service of alcohol.

II.

6
The dissenting judge “agree[d] with the majority that the
[social affair] permit was not admissible because it referenced
a standard that was at variance with the Dram Shop.”
14
Plaintiff Dianne Mazzacano basically argues that because a
licensed alcoholic beverage server is only negligent under the
Dram Shop Act when a visibly-intoxicated patron is served
alcohol, the Act necessarily presupposes that the server will
actually observe the person who is served alcohol. From that
simple premise, she reasons that the Legislature could not have
intended that a licensed alcoholic beverage server would escape
liability when failing to monitor the self-service of alcohol at
a party, particularly given the significant and foreseeable
risks posed by drunk drivers. She therefore submits that the
trial court wrongly refused to charge the jury that the Happy
Hour Social and Athletic Club had a duty to monitor the intake
of alcohol by guests at the Pig Roast.
In contrast, defendant Happy Hour Social and Athletic Club
contends that the Dram Shop Act, which is the exclusive civil
remedy for the negligent service of alcohol by a licensed
server, does not provide an independent basis for liability for
failure to monitor. The Club concedes that the self-service of
alcohol at the Pig Roast constituted the service of alcohol by
the Club. Significantly, the Club did not object to the court’s
jury charge, which stated that if it allowed Kinnerman to serve
alcohol to himself while he was visibly intoxicated, it would be
negligent and therefore liable for the accident, provided
plaintiff proved the additional elements of proximate cause and
15
forseeability. The Club’s main defense was that Kinnerman was
not visibly intoxicated when he left the Pig Roast. The Club
urges the Court not to judicially impose, as a basis for civil
liability, a duty of monitoring that does not appear in the Dram
Shop Act.
In determining whether the Act imposes civil liability on
a licensed alcoholic beverage server for not monitoring the
self-service of alcohol at a party, we turn first to the text of
the statute and then to the statute’s policy objectives, which
are set forth in the Act itself.

III.
A.
The New Jersey Licensed Alcoholic Beverage Server Fair
Liability Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-1 to -7, known more commonly as
the Dram Shop Act,7 is “the exclusive civil remedy for personal
injury or property damage resulting from the negligent service
of alcoholic beverages by a licensed alcoholic beverage server,”

7
The term “dram shop” was first used in the 1830s to describe
inns where “liquor was sold in quantities of less than a
gallon.” Jana L. Morino, Comment, Tobin v. Norwood Country
Club, Inc.: The Massachussetts Emergence of Dram Shop Liability
for Intoxicated Minors Without Evidence of a Direct Sale to the
Minor, 33 New Eng. L. Rev. 173, 173 n.3 (1998) (citation
omitted). Today, the term refers to “an establishment in which
liquor is served to be consumed on the premises.” Ibid. (citing
Black’s Law Dictionary 494 (6th ed. 1990)).

16
N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-4 (emphasis added). Under the Dram Shop Act, “a
licensed alcoholic beverage server” can be held liable for
damages suffered by “[a] person who sustains personal injury or
property damage as a result of the negligent service of
alcoholic beverages . . . only if” three elements are
established:
(1) The server is deemed negligent . . .; and
(2) The injury or damage was proximately
caused by the negligent service of alcoholic
beverages; and

(3) The injury or damage was a foreseeable
consequence of the negligent service of
alcoholic beverages.

[N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-5(a) (emphasis added).]

Under the Act, a licensed alcoholic beverage server is
“negligent only when the server served a visibly intoxicated
person, or served a minor . . . .” N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-5(b)
(emphasis added).
There is no question that the Happy Hour Social and
Athletic Club was a licensed alcoholic beverage server for
purposes of the Dram Shop Act because it was issued a social
affair permit to sell alcoholic beverages by the New Jersey
Division of Alcohol Beverage Control pursuant to N.J.S.A. 33:1-
74. See N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-3 (“‘Licensed alcoholic beverage
server’ or ‘server’ means a person . . . who has been issued a
permit to sell alcoholic beverages by the Division of Alcoholic
17
Beverage Control in the Department of Law and Public Safety.”).
Therefore, the dictates of the Dram Shop Act apply to this case.
As noted earlier, the Club does not deny that the self-
service of alcohol at the party constituted service of alcohol
under the Act. That is, the Club does not read the statute to
require that an alcoholic drink must be served by a bartender,
waitress, or other such person before liability can attach under
the statute.
In this case, the trial court correctly instructed the
jurors that if “the Happy Hour Social & Athletic Club of Maple
Shade allowed Mr. Kinnerman to consume alcoholic beverages when
he was visibly intoxicated, then you must find the [Club] was
negligent.” The Legislature did not intend that a licensed
alcoholic beverage server would benefit from willful blindness
by hosting a party that permits the self-service of alcohol.
For purposes of N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-5(b), a licensed alcoholic
beverage server that places at the disposal of its patrons a
“beer truck” for the self-service of alcohol is serving alcohol
within the intendment of the statute. See Dower v. Gamba, 276
N.J. Super. 319, 326 (App. Div. 1994), certif. denied, 140 N.J.
276 (1995) (“[W]e have no doubt that a commercial server who
provides alcohol to a customer by a means other than direct
service may nonetheless be liable under N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-5b,
notwithstanding the use of the term ‘serve’ in the statute.”).
18
Thus, if a licensed alcoholic beverage server serves alcohol in
this manner to a visibly-intoxicated person, it is acting
negligently and is exposed to civil liability.
Allowing the service of alcohol to a “visibly intoxicated
person” -- who causes personal injury or property damage that is
a proximate and foreseeable consequence of his intoxication --
will expose a licensed alcoholic beverage server to civil
liability under N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-5(b). A licensed alcoholic
beverage server without adequate insurance can suffer economic
ruin from a lawsuit or lose its ability to secure insurance in
the future. For that reason, even if not motivated by any
benevolent purpose, a licensed alcoholic beverage server has a
strong economic incentive to monitor the condition of persons
served alcohol.
Plaintiff’s case boiled down to one essential but disputed
fact -- whether Kinnerman was allowed to serve himself alcohol
while visibly intoxicated. Had anyone observed Kinnerman
visibly intoxicated before he walked off the Club’s grounds, the
jury would have been free to infer that the Club allowed
Kinnerman to drink himself into a state of intoxication. No one
who observed Kinnerman during the picnic was of the opinion that
he met the definition of visibly intoxicated. See N.J.S.A.
2A:22A-3 (“‘Visibly intoxicated’ means a state of intoxication
accompanied by a perceptible act or series of acts which present
19
clear signs of intoxication.”). Moreover, three men, including
a Prosecutor’s investigator, who presumably were in a position
to discern Kinnerman’s condition, chose to be passengers in
Kinnerman’s Ford Mustang before the deadly ride. Even Dr.
Pandina, the toxicologist who testified for plaintiff, could not
state with certitude -- only to a reasonable degree of
probability -- that Kinnerman exhibited signs of intoxication at
the picnic. Although Dr. Pandina relied on statistical evidence
that most people with Kinnerman’s 0.181 BAC reading will show
symptoms of intoxication, he also indicated that not all people
will reveal such symptoms. It was the jury’s task to decide
what weight, if any, to give to the testimony of the witnesses
at the Pig Roast and the expert testimony. Had there been no
testimony concerning Kinnerman’s condition at the picnic, the
jury might well have been persuaded that Dr. Pandina’s testimony
was sufficient to prove the Club’s negligence. Ultimately, the
jury determined that the Club did not negligently provide
alcoholic beverages to Kinnerman when he was visibly
intoxicated.
We conclude that there was sufficient credible evidence in
the record to support the jury’s verdict in favor of the Club.
We now address the dissent in the Appellate Division.

B.
20
The dissenting judge on the appellate panel concluded that
the Dram Shop Act contained an “evident gap” in cases involving
the self-service of alcohol -- a gap that could be filled by
imposing on licensed alcoholic beverage servers a duty to
monitor. He believed that imposing a duty to monitor is
“entirely consistent with” the Act’s objectives, regardless of
the absence of statutory language setting forth such a duty.
The dissenting judge would construe the Dram Shop Act, even if
it meant enlarging it, to meet the “evident sense of the
lawgiver.” (Quoting Wright v. Vogt, 7 N.J. 1, 6 (1951)). In
his opinion, the trial court should have instructed the jury
that the Club had “a ‘responsibility to monitor alcoholic
consumption,’” and that if it failed to do so the jury “was free
to infer that Kinnerman’s intoxication could have been observed
if the alcohol consumption had been properly monitored.”
The type of judicial tinkering with the statute proposed by
the dissenting judge is not consonant with the language used in
the Dram Shop Act or the legislative intent underlying the Act.
The Legislature clearly signaled that the Dram Shop Act is “the
exclusive civil remedy . . . [for] the negligent service of
alcoholic beverages by a licensed alcoholic beverage server.”
N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-4. That language strongly suggests that the
Legislature did not want our courts adding civil remedies,
through either the common law or creative statutory
21
construction, not found in the Act itself. See Verni v. Harry
M. Stevens, Inc., 387 N.J. Super. 160, 187 (App. Div.), certif.
denied, 189 N.J. 429 (2007) (“Common law claims arising out of
the negligent service of alcoholic beverages are thus barred by
the exclusivity provisions of the Beverage Server Act.”
(citation omitted)). Indeed, in Fisch v. Bellshot, 135 N.J. 374
(1994), we held that “the Legislature drafted subsection b [of
N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-5] precisely to render service to a visibly-
intoxicated person the only defining act of negligence other
than serving alcohol to a person whom one knows or reasonably
should know under the circumstances is a minor.” Id. at 383.
We noted that in light of N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-5(b)’s specific
language circumscribing liability, “[n]egligence is not
definable by reference to administrative regulations.” Ibid.
Significantly, the Dram Shop Act was passed at a time when
licensed alcoholic beverage servers were facing a liability
insurance crisis. See N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-2. The statute was
carefully crafted to balance both the needs of licensed
alcoholic beverage servers to secure affordable insurance and
the rights of victims to recover for the negligent service of
alcohol. See ibid. The Legislature expressed its purpose in
very clear terms by stating that
lack of insurance adversely affects not only
the licensed alcoholic beverage servers
themselves, but also patrons and third
22
persons who suffer personal injury and
property damage as a result of the negligent
service of alcoholic beverages by a licensed
alcoholic beverage server.

In order to make it economically
feasible for insurance companies to provide
coverage, the incidence of liability should
be more predictable. That predictability may
be achieved by defining the limits of the
civil liability of licensed alcoholic
beverage servers in order to encourage the
development and implementation of risk
reduction techniques.

This act has been designed to protect
the rights of persons who suffer loss as a
result of the negligent service of alcoholic
beverages by a licensed alcoholic beverage
server while at the same time providing a
balanced and reasonable procedure for
allocating responsibility for such losses.
It is anticipated that this act may result
in the improvement of the alcoholic beverage
liability insurance market in this State.

[N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-2.]

We cannot, and should not, “rewrite a plainly-written
enactment of the Legislature” or “write in an additional
qualification which the Legislature pointedly omitted.”
DiProspero v. Penn, 183 N.J. 477, 492 (2005) (citations and
internal quotation marks omitted). “Our duty is to construe and
apply the statute as enacted.” Ibid. (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted). We have previously stated that
“[t]here is a fine line between interpreting statutory language
and engrafting a judicial standard over that language.” Serrano
v. Serrano, 183 N.J. 508, 518 (2005). We believe that the
23
dissenting judge’s approach would “create[] a judicial standard
not intended by those who wrote and enacted the statute.” Ibid.
As we already have discussed, the Dram Shop Act permits a
finding of liability when an establishment, such as the Happy
Hour Social and Athletic Club, allows a patron to become visibly
intoxicated through the self-service of alcohol at a party. For
that reason alone, under the Act, a licensed alcoholic beverage
server has a compelling economic interest to monitor the intake
of alcohol. The Club did not benefit from the absence of
monitors; rather it unnecessarily exposed itself to a
potentially staggering liability award. However, the Dram Shop
Act does not impose a separate duty to monitor alcohol ingestion
or define negligence, the only available cause of action in the
Act, as the failure to monitor. Rather, a licensed alcoholic
beverage server is negligent “only when the server served a
visibly intoxicated person” or serves a minor. N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-
5(b).8

8
We note that the holder of a social affair permit is subject to
the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Law, N.J.S.A. 33:1-1 to
-97, and the regulations promulgated under that Act. See, e.g.,
N.J.S.A. 33:1-12.37 (“Any person violating any provision of this
act or of any rule or regulation issued pursuant to this act
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $50.00 and not more
than $250.00 and such person shall also be subject to the
penalties and provisions of chapter 1 of Title 33 which are
applicable thereto by virtue of such violation.”); N.J.A.C.
13:2-5.1(g) (“A social affair permittee must abide by all the
provisions of the New Jersey Alcoholic Beverage law, Division
rules and regulations, and municipal ordinances. Failure to do
24
Needless to say, the Legislature is free to enact higher
standards -- such as a duty to monitor -- than those presently
found in our statutes, based on the reasoning of the dissenting
judge.
IV.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Appellate
Division.
CHIEF JUSTICE RABNER and JUSTICES LONG, LaVECCHIA, WALLACE,
RIVERA-SOTO and HOENS join in JUSTICE ALBIN’s opinion.

so may result in said permittee being denied future applications
for social affair permits.”).
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY

NO. A-102 SEPTEMBER TERM 2007
ON APPEAL FROM Appellate Division, Superior Court

DIANE M. MAZZACANO,
Administratrix ad
Prosequendum and General
Administratrix of the Estate
Of STEPHEN N. MIKALIC,
Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

HAPPY HOUR SOCIAL AND
ATHLETIC CLUB OF MAPLE SHADE,
INC.,

Defendant-Respondent.





DECIDED January 22, 2009
Chief Justice Rabner PRESIDING
OPINION BY Justice Albin
CONCURRING/DISSENTING OPINION BY
DISSENTING OPINION BY
CHECKLIST AFFIRM
CHIEF JUSTICE RABNER X
JUSTICE LONG X
JUSTICE LaVECCHIA X
JUSTICE ALBIN X
JUSTICE WALLACE X
JUSTICE RIVERA-SOTO X
JUSTICE HOENS X
TOTALS 7