SC Judge denies motion to dismiss corporate giant Parker's from Beach/Murdaugh boat crash lawsuit

A South Carolina circuit court judge ruled Friday (May 19) that a multi-million convenience store chain and its corporate owner will not be dismissed from one of the most important civil suits facing convicted murderer and accused fraudster Alex Murdaugh.

Judge Daniel D. Hall ruled today not to dismiss Gregory M. Parker and his Parker's Corporation from a Hampton County wrongful death suit filed by the family and estate of teen Mallory Beach, who died after being ejected from Murdaugh's boat in February of 2019 in a drunken boating accident involving his younger son, Paul.

"Parker's motion bordered on being frivolous and seems to have been intended to spread a false narrative, so we fully expected the judge to deny the motion," said Allendale attorney Mark Tinsley, lead counsel for the Beach family. "We are looking forward to concluding this matter in August and beginning to give the Beach family some semblance of closure."

"While we believe summary judgment should have been granted, we remain confident a jury will use their common sense and find that Tajeeha Cohen and Parker's are not responsible for the death of Mallory Beach," said P.K. Shere, attorney for Parker's.

Unless further motions are filed, the case is set to go to joint trial, with Murdaugh and Parkers as codefendants, in Hampton County Court of Common Pleas beginning Aug. 14.

What was at stake in this high-profile lawsuit?

While several parties were named in the original suit, most of them settled early, bringing an undisclosed amount of financial damages to the grieving family, and now Murdaugh and Parker/Parkers are the only named defendants as the civil suit heads to a jury trial.

The Beach family's attorneys think that Murdaugh and Parker should both be held liable during a joint trial, but Parker's, in a recent court filing, contends that it has not violated any laws and should be dismissed from the case.

Both sides have valid arguments.

Beach attorneys wanted to hold both Murdaugh, Parker's liable in court

The Beach wrongful death suit, originally filed in March 2019 but amended several times, alleges that Murdaugh and his late wife, Maggie, knowingly allowed their underaged son, Paul, to consume alcohol to excess, often further enabling him by providing the alcohol, and then allowed him to operate the family's watercraft while intoxicated.

The complaint further alleged that Parker's Corporation is liable for making an illegal sale of alcohol to the underaged Paul Murdaugh, and for failing to verify his ID or to check that it matched the name on the credit card he used to pay for the alcohol.

Paul Murdaugh purchased the beer from Parker's store in Okatie just prior to the crash using a driver's license belonging to his brother, Richard Alexander "Buster" Murdaugh Jr., according to court filings.

Renee Beach, Mallory's mother, and her family are pursuing a "joint and several awards" against both defendants for actual and punitive damages that could be worth millions of dollars, as well as costs and legal fees.

Arguably, from a financial standpoint, it is crucial to the Beach's case that Parker's be included when the matter goes to trial Aug. 14. Parker's is a multi-million corporation with stores around the Southeast and on track to exceed a billion dollars in sales per year, according to industry reports.

While Parker's would have the ability to pay damages, Murdaugh, who is currently facing more than 100 criminal charges and 11 other lawsuits, has had his assets frozen and liquidated by the court and would be extremely limited in how much he could pay to any of his multiple alleged victims and plaintiffs.

The Beach family is represented by a legal team led by Allendale attorney Mark Tinsley, whose testimony was instrumental in helping earn a double murder conviction against Murdaugh in March.

Parkers claimed no criminal charges filed, Murdaugh is at fault

In its latest legal filings, Parker's acknowledges that Beach's death is an unfortunate tragedy, but they say it is a death that could have been prevented by several other people, including the boaters and the parents of the boaters, and they are not liable.

On March 24, attorneys for Parker's filed a motion for summary judgment asking for all claims against them to be dismissed with prejudice. The motion makes several key points:

• The motion contends that Parker's did not knowingly sell alcohol to a minor and that it was a valid South Carolina sale because the S.C. Law Enforcement Division (SLED), the state agency that handles illegal alcohol sales, investigated the matter and did not issue the store any citation or reprimand.

"Accordingly, because there is no evidence that Parker’s violated South Carolina law by knowingly selling beer or wine to an underage person, as SLED confirmed, Plaintiff cannot maintain her claims sounding in negligence in connection with the alcohol sale at issue in this case," the filing states.

• The motion points out that all of the boaters were adults and alleges that all knew that Murdaugh was "noticeably intoxicated" but they "voluntarily chose to ignore several different opportunities throughout the night to arrange for alternative transportation or to simply not get back on that boat with a highly intoxicated driver."

"Indeed, the evidence is uncontroverted that the Boaters, who drank with Mr. Murdaugh for many hours that evening, waited for him and Mr. [Conner] Cook to go to a bar in Beaufort to drink even more alcohol, instead of getting alternative transportation home, and then the Boaters, including Ms. Beach, voluntarily got back on the boat being operated by a clearly drunk Mr. Murdaugh."

• Parker's claims that the boaters, including Beach, knew about Paul Murdaugh's "proclivity for excessive alcohol drinking and his unpredictable, reckless, and dangerous conduct while drunk... "

• The boaters were aware it was a dark and foggy night, and the only light on the boat was a handheld flashlight, yet they traveled by water anyway, despite several parents advising them not to, the filing states, adding:

"The tragedy of that evening also could have been prevented if the adults at the oyster roast, some of whom were relatives of the Boaters, including parents, uncles, and aunts, would have stopped the group from getting back on the boat after drinking in their presence all evening.

• The filing alleges that Parker's is a victim of fraud perpetrated by Paul Murdaugh, who used his brother's ID. Both brothers have red hair and could arguably have facial similarities.

• Ironically, Parker's used the Beach family's own evidence against them in this filing. Attached to a May 1 court filing was a May 4, 2022, affidavit from Morgan Doughty, one of the boaters, which included numerous photos and videos allegedly proving that Paul's parents enable him and his underage friends in their drinking, and all of the boaters knew about it. This affidavit had previously been attached to the Beach's amended lawsuit complaint against Murdaugh.

The Greenville News will continue to cover this case and other cases associated with the Murdaugh crime saga.

Follow Michael DeWitt's reporting on Twitter @mmdewittjr.

This article originally appeared on Greenville News: SC Judge denies motion to dismiss Parker's from Beach/Murdaugh boat crash lawsuit