Spartanburg County is leading South Carolina in traffic fatalities in 2026, and county officials, law enforcement, and the coroner's office have launched a multi-agency initiative aimed at improving transparency and saving lives. Impaired driving remains one of the most preventable causes behind those numbers.
A drunk driving crash isn't an accident in the ordinary sense; it's the result of a choice, and South Carolina law treats it that way, allowing punitive damages and, in some cases, claims against the bar or restaurant that overserved the driver.
If you or someone you love was injured by a drunk driver in Spartanburg, The Arndt Law Firm has the experience to guide you through what comes next. We know how insurers evaluate and resist these claims, and we know how to fight for the compensation you're entitled to. No legal promise, only a commitment to your recovery. Call us at (843) 310-4645 for a free consultation.
When a drunk driver causes a crash, two distinct legal processes can follow, and understanding the difference matters to an injured person. The criminal case, brought by the State, seeks to punish the driver for the crime of driving under the influence through penalties like fines, license suspension, and jail. The civil claim the injured person brings seeks compensation for the harm the crash caused.
They are separate, with different purposes, different standards of proof, and different outcomes. This separation has practical consequences.
The civil claim does not depend on a criminal conviction; an injured person can recover in the civil claim even if the criminal case results in no conviction, because the civil standard of proof is lower than the criminal standard. At the same time, evidence and findings from the criminal case, including the results of breath or blood testing and any conviction, can support the civil claim, and the two proceed on their own timelines.
For the injured person, the focus is on the civil claim and the recovery it can provide. While the criminal case addresses the driver's offense against the State, only the civil claim compensates the injured person for medical costs, lost income, pain, and other harm caused by the crash.
The civil claim can also pursue avenues that the criminal case does not, including punitive damages and, in some circumstances, claims against parties other than the driver. The civil claim is the path to compensation, and it can proceed regardless of the criminal outcome.
Drunk driving cases are among the situations in which punitive damages are available, because the conduct involved is precisely the kind the law seeks to punish and deter.
South Carolina allows punitive damages where the injured person proves by clear and convincing evidence that the responsible party's conduct was willful, wanton, or reckless. Choosing to drive while impaired, with the foreseeable danger it poses to everyone on the road, readily meets that standard.
Punitive damages are different from the compensation for the injury itself. While compensatory damages address the injured person's medical costs, lost income, and pain and suffering, punitive damages are meant to punish the wrongdoer and to deter others from similar conduct.
In a drunk driving case, they reflect society's condemnation of the choice to drive impaired, and they can add significantly to the recovery, holding the driver accountable in a way that compensation alone does not.
South Carolina caps punitive damages under S.C. Code § 15-32-530(A) at the greater of three times compensatory damages or $500,000, with the cap adjusted annually for inflation. That cap can be removed entirely in a drunk driving case, but it is not automatic: under S.C. Code § 15-32-530(C)(3), the trial court must determine that the defendant acted while under the influence of alcohol or drugs to the degree that the defendant’s judgment was substantially impaired.
When the evidence supports that finding, no cap applies. Even where the cap is not removed outright, it may be raised. Under S.C. Code § 15-32-530(B), if the trial court determines the defendant’s actions could subject the defendant to conviction of a felony, as felony DUI under S.C. Code § 56-5-2945 can, the limit becomes the greater of four times compensatory damages or $2,000,000.
The lifting of the cap matters most in the cases where the harm is greatest. In a catastrophic injury or death caused by a drunk driver, the compensatory damages alone can be very large, and the punitive damages, freed from the usual cap, can reflect the full gravity of the driver's choice to drive impaired.
The legislature's decision to remove the cap on impaired driving signals that the conduct is to be treated as among the most serious, and that a claim arising from a drunk driving crash can seek punitive damages that genuinely punish and deter, rather than damages constrained by a limit designed for ordinary negligence.
Establishing the driver's impairment by clear and convincing evidence, through the chemical testing, the officers' observations, and the circumstances of the crash, is what supports this uncapped punitive recovery.
In some cases, responsibility for a drunk driving crash extends beyond the driver to a business that served alcohol to a visibly intoxicated person. South Carolina has no statute called a dram shop act. Liability for overservice is a common-law negligence claim, established by treating violations of alcohol-control laws as negligence per se.
Those laws prohibit a beer and wine permittee from knowingly selling to an intoxicated person or to anyone under twenty-one (S.C. Code § 61-4-580(A)), and impose a parallel prohibition on retailers of alcoholic liquors (S.C. Code § 61-6-1500(A)(1)(d)). Whether an establishment can be held responsible therefore turns on proof that it served a person it knew to be intoxicated, and on ordinary negligence principles, rather than on the statute alone.
This avenue can be significant because it provides an additional source of responsibility and insurance beyond the driver, which matters when the harm is serious and the driver's coverage is limited.
A bar, restaurant, or other establishment that continued serving a visibly intoxicated patron who then caused a crash may share responsibility for the resulting harm, and licensed establishments are required to carry liquor-liability insurance that may respond to such a claim.
South Carolina changed how liability is allocated in alcohol-service cases effective January 1, 2026, but the change applies only to claims arising after that date.
For claims arising on or after January 1, 2026, S.C. Code § 61-2-147 changes how a dram shop verdict is allocated. Where the driver has been charged with driving under the influence, driving with an unlawful alcohol concentration, or felony DUI, the licensee may move within 180 days of the start of the case to place that driver on the jury verdict form.
If the verdict then runs against both the establishment and the driver, the establishment is jointly and severally liable for fifty percent of the plaintiff’s actual damages. Where the driver was never charged, the provision does not apply and the ordinary apportionment rules of § 15-38-15 govern instead. Which rule applies to your case depends on the date of the crash.
A drunk driving claim, like any car accident claim, requires establishing how the crash happened and who was responsible, and the driver's impairment is central to that. The evidence of impairment often comes from the criminal investigation: the responding officers' observations, the field sobriety tests, and the results of breath or blood testing. A driver's measured blood alcohol concentration, any admissions, and the officers' account of the driver's condition all support the civil claim.
South Carolina's comparative negligence rule still applies. Under Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co., 303 S.C. 243, 399 S.E.2d 783 (1991), an injured person may recover as long as their own share of the fault is fifty percent or less, with the award reduced by that percentage; at fifty-one percent or more, recovery is barred. But in a drunk driving case, the impaired driver's responsibility is usually clear.
The injured person, who did nothing wrong, is in a strong position, and the driver's impairment and the conduct that caused the crash establish the driver's fault. The insurer may nonetheless look for any basis to assign some fault to the injured person, and meeting that effort with the evidence of how the crash happened protects the recovery.
Beyond the testimony about the driver's behavior, the objective evidence of a blood alcohol concentration over the legal limit, the physical evidence of the crash, and the criminal proceedings provide a strong foundation.
Part of building the civil claim is preserving this evidence and obtaining records from the criminal investigation. The combination of the impairment evidence and the crash evidence establishes both the driver's fault and the recklessness that supports punitive damages.
A drunk driving claim arising in Spartanburg County is filed in the Court of Common Pleas for the Seventh Judicial Circuit, at the Spartanburg County Courthouse, 180 Magnolia Street in downtown Spartanburg; the courthouse that opened in 2023 and replaced the former Magnolia Street building.
Drunk driving crashes commonly cause severe injuries because impaired drivers often drive at high speeds, fail to brake, or cause head-on and other high-energy collisions. The injuries common to these crashes include traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, multiple fractures, internal injuries, and severe and fatal harm.
When a serious drunk driving crash occurs in the Spartanburg area, the most critically injured are treated at Spartanburg Medical Center, the American College of Surgeons-verified Level I trauma center serving the Upstate.
The recovery in a drunk driving case includes the full range of compensatory damages, the medical costs, future care, lost income and earning capacity, and the pain, suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life the injury causes, along with the punitive damages that the driver's conduct can support.
The combination of compensatory and uncapped punitive damages, and the potential for a dram shop claim against an overserving establishment, can make the available recovery in a drunk driving case substantial, reflecting both the harm done and the law's condemnation of impaired driving.
When a drunk driving crash takes a life, the loss is addressed through a wrongful death claim, which carries its own considerations. In the most serious cases, the combination of catastrophic injury or death, the availability of uncapped punitive damages, and the potential for multiple responsible parties makes a thorough investigation and a complete accounting of the harm essential to a recovery that reflects what the crash truly cost.
The steps taken after a crash caused by a suspected drunk driver can impact both the criminal and civil outcomes, and some are particular to these cases. The first priority is always medical care, both to protect health and to document the injuries at their origin. Because drunk driving crashes are often high-energy collisions producing severe injuries, thorough evaluation and follow-through on treatment are essential.
At the scene, ensuring law enforcement responds is especially important in a suspected drunk driving case because officers will investigate the driver's impairment, conduct field sobriety and chemical tests, and create the official record that supports both the criminal case and the civil claim.
To the extent possible, document the scene, the vehicles, and any signs of the driver's impairment and gather the names of witnesses to preserve evidence that supports the claim. Witnesses who observed the driver's condition or behavior can be valuable to both the impairment evidence and any potential dram shop claim.
In the days that follow, obtain the criminal investigation records to support the civil claim. Because a dram shop claim depends on time-sensitive evidence about where and how the driver was drinking, and because the establishment's records and the recollections of witnesses can fade or disappear, investigating matters is critical.
Be cautious in dealings with the at-fault driver's insurer, and understand the full value of the claim, including the potential for uncapped punitive damages and a dram shop claim, before responding to any early offer. Seeking advice early helps ensure that all avenues available in a drunk driving claim are preserved and developed.
The places and patterns of drunk driving crashes in the Spartanburg area reflect the area's roads and its nightlife. The revitalized downtown around Morgan Square, with its bars, restaurants, and entertainment venues, draws people out for evenings.
The impaired driving that can follow a night of drinking puts others on the road at risk. The arterials and the routes leading away from the entertainment districts and back toward residential areas are where many of these crashes occur, as impaired drivers make their way home.
The interstate system carries its own drunk driving risk. I-85 and I-26 and the high-conflict interchange where they meet carry traffic at high speed, and an impaired driver on the interstate, particularly at night, poses an extreme danger, with the speeds involved making any resulting crash likely to be catastrophic.
Spartanburg County recorded 190 fatal and serious-injury crashes in 2025. US-29 and I-85 are two of the county’s most dangerous roadways. US-29 runs straight through the corridor between downtown Spartanburg and the interstates, carrying the traffic leaving the Morgan Square district at night.
The combination of the entertainment districts, the arterials leading home, and the high-speed interstates creates the conditions in which drunk driving crashes occur in the area, often at night when impaired drivers are most likely to be on the road.
Investigating a drunk driving crash in the area can involve retracing the driver's evening, both to establish the impairment and to determine whether a dram shop claim against an overserving establishment may exist. Where the driver was drinking, whether they were served while visibly intoxicated, and the timeline of the evening can reveal an additional responsible party.
Evidence doesn't wait around. Establishment records get deleted, witnesses forget details, and security footage gets overwritten, often within days. That's why investigators need to move fast.
Location matters too. Where the crash happened, which entertainment district, and which route someone likely took home tell you a lot about how it occurred. A bar's proximity to a busy highway on-ramp, or a known shortcut through residential streets, can shape the whole picture of liability. Skip the investigation, or rush it, and you risk missing the coverage and liability details that actually decide the case.
| Avenue in a drunk driving claim | What it provides |
| Compensatory damages | Medical costs, lost income, pain and suffering |
| Punitive damages (S.C. Code § 15-32-530) | Punish and deter; the usual cap is lifted for impaired driving |
| Dram shop liability (§ 61-4-580) | A claim against a business that overserved the driver |
| Criminal case evidence | Supports the civil claim but is not required for recovery |
Yes. The civil claim is separate from the criminal case and seeks compensation for your injuries. It can proceed regardless of the criminal outcome, and the civil standard of proof is lower.
Yes. Drunk driving readily meets the standard for punitive damages, and South Carolina lifts the usual cap on punitive damages when the driver was impaired by alcohol or drugs.
Possibly. South Carolina allows liability for serving a visibly intoxicated person, though a 2026 change limits an establishment's share to 50 percent of actual damages when both it and the driver are liable.
Most South Carolina injury claims must be filed within three years under S.C. Code § 15-3-530(5). Where the crash causes a death, the wrongful death claim runs from the date of death rather than the date of the crash. Claims involving an injured child are subject to tolling under S.C. Code § 15-3-40, and the deadline should be confirmed on a case-by-case basis rather than assumed.
Different rules apply if the drunk driver was working for a government agency at the time. Under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act, the claim must be brought within two years, extended to three years only if a verified claim is first filed with the agency within one year (S.C. Code § 15-78-110; § 15-78-80).
Recovery is capped at $300,000 per person and $600,000 per occurrence, and § 15-78-120 prohibits any award of punitive damages against a governmental entity, so the uncapped punitive recovery available against a private drunk driver is not available in that case.
Yes, as long as you were 50 percent or less at fault. In most drunk driving cases, the impaired driver's responsibility is clear, putting the injured person in a strong position.
When The Arndt Law Firm takes on a drunk driving case in Spartanburg, our approach is thorough. We establish the driver's impairment and responsibility, pursue punitive damages, which have no cap when the conduct warrants it, and investigate whether a dram shop claim applies against a bar or restaurant that overserved the driver. We also document the full extent of the harm caused.
Attorney Arndt spent years defending insurers and institutional clients before shifting to this work. That background matters: it means we know how the other side evaluates and fights these claims, and we use that insight to hold every responsible party accountable.
If you or someone you love was hurt by a drunk driver in Spartanburg or anywhere in Spartanburg County, contact us immediately. Evidence of impairment and overservice can disappear fast, and much of it is in someone else's hands.
The first consultation costs nothing, and we handle drunk driving cases on contingency; you owe no fee unless we win. The proof that establishes what the driver did, and whether an establishment played a role, is easiest to find in the days right after the crash.
Reach out and tell us what happened.
Last reviewed: June 2026
This page was reviewed by Jonathan S. Arndt, licensed in South Carolina since 2018.
Content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed South Carolina attorney for guidance specific to your situation.
