Illinois drunk driving laws are in place to punish drunk drivers and deter future misconduct. Depending on how drunk someone was, if they have had previous violations and other factors, penalties can range from a moderate fine to mandatory prison time.
However, when a drunk driver injures someone else, simply punishing the driver is not enough. People injured in a drunk driving accident need to be compensated for their injuries. To do so, they can file a personal injury claim against the driver's insurance company or in civil court. While the principles of duty of care, negligence and damages apply to drunk driving accident cases the same way they do to any injury claim, there are other laws and legal principles and precedents specific to drunk driving claims.
The Ultimate Guide to Illinois Drunk Driving Accident Laws in Personal Injury Claims
Negligence Per Se
"Per se" in Latin means "intrinsically," "in itself" or "by itself." Negligence per se is a legal doctrine that anyone who violates a statute or law is automatically liable for the damage they cause as a matter of law. Drunk driving is obviously illegal under Illinois law, and it violates 625 ILCS 5/11. When we sue drunk drivers, we file a separate negligence per se charge.
Typically in personal injury claims you have to prove that the defendant owed you a duty of care, negligently breached that duty and that their negligence directly contributed to your injuries. In a drunk driving claim, you only have to show that the driver was drunk and that the accident caused your injuries.
Dram Shop Laws
A "dram shop law" is a law that allows people to make a claim against a licensed alcohol vendor if they served someone who caused their injuries alcohol beforehand. The Illinois Liquor Control Act is relatively liberal compared to other states' dram shop laws in that it does not require that the vendor did anything wrong, such as selling to someone underaged or who was visibly intoxicated. You must prove three things to win a dram shop case:
- The vendor served the patron alcohol
- The alcohol caused or contributed to the patron's intoxication
- The intoxication was the proximate cause of your injuries
Dram shop laws are essential if your damages exceed the at-fault driver's policy limits.
Limitations of the Illinois Dram Shop Law
Claims can only be made against licensed alcohol vendors who sell alcohol that is meant to be ingested on their premises. Meaning, usually, a bar or restaurant. You cannot sue a grocery store or liquor store for your injuries.
Each year, the Illinois Office of the Comptroller sets a limit to how much you can recover from a vendor in a dram shop liability claim. In 2022, those limits are $77,787.30 per injured person, or $95,073.37 per injured person if the accident results in loss of support or loss of society.
Social Host Liability in Illinois
Some states have what is referred to as "social host liability," where someone who throws a private party, or allows a friend to get drunk in their home, can be held liable. Illinois is not one of those states. In Cruse v. Aden, 127 Ill. 231, 239, 20 N.E. 73 (1889), the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that you cannot sue someone:
who, in his own house, or elsewhere, gives a glass of intoxicating liquor to a friend as a mere act of courtesy and politeness.
In Cunningham v. Brown, 22 Ill.2d 23, 174 N.E.2d 153 (1961), the court affirmed that no social host law exists in Illinois.
There is one exception. In 2004, Illinois passed the Drug or Alcohol Impaired Minor Responsibility Act. The act stipulates that someone can be held liable if:
- They were over 18 and willfully provided alcohol to a minor on a residential property; or
- They were over 18 and willfully permitted a minor to drink alcohol on a non-residential property controlled by the person, such as their place of business or a hotel room they paid for
If an adult allows a minor to drink on their residential property, but does not willfully provide the alcohol, they cannot be held liable.
Punitive Damages
Punitive damages are not included in most personal injury claims. They are meant to punish the defendant for egregious recklessness and deter future misbehavior. In most cases, such as being injured by someone who was texting and driving, or slipping after a store failed to clean up a wet spot, punitive damages do not apply as the behavior is not wanton, intentional or egregiously reckless.
However, Illinois courts sometimes allow plaintiffs to seek punitive damages in drunk driving cases. 735 ILCS 5/2-1115.05 states that, in order to recover punitive damages:
a plaintiff must show by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant's conduct was with evil motive or with a reckless and outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm and with a conscious indifference to the rights and safety of others.
A skilled car accident lawyer will be able to convince a court that drunk driving, especially if their blood-alcohol content was far over the .08 limit, presents a highly unreasonable risk of harm and a conscious indifference to the safety of others.
A claim for punitive damages must be approved by the court, and the award may not exceed three times your economic damages.
How a Criminal Drunk Driving Case Affects a Civil Case
If you were injured by a drunk driver, assuming the police were called, that driver was arrested and is facing criminal charges. However, the criminal case and your civil suit are two entirely different processes with different codes and laws guiding them. In a criminal case the state is prosecuting the drunk driver. In a civil case, you are negotiating with the insurance company to give you the full compensation you are owed.
The burden of proof in civil cases, called a preponderance of the evidence, is much lower than the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard in criminal trials. While a criminal defense lawyer may be able to raise issues with the police report or doubts about the breathalyzer test to get their client's case thrown out, those tactics do not work in civil cases. All you need to prove is that it is "more likely than not" that the defendant was drunk. Pictures of them being arrested by police, or a video of their behavior, is likely more than enough proof.
Similarly, a drunk driver does not have to be found guilty in a criminal case in order to be liable for your damages. While a criminal conviction would be a great negotiating chip to use against the insurance company, the outcome of their criminal case, whether they are found guilty or not, has no direct effect on your claim.
Another difference is the application of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The amendment allows defendants, in both criminal and civil cases, to refuse to answer questions. In a criminal case, their silence cannot be used to infer guilty. However, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308 (1976) that you can infer liability if someone pleads the fifth in a civil case.