DUI and Multi-Car Crashes Under South Carolina’s New 2026 Law

At Palmetto State Injury Lawyers, we see it all the time: a chain-reaction crash where multiple drivers share blame. These cases are already complicated, but starting January 1, 2026, a new South Carolina law—H.3430—will change how fault and damages are handled.

Automobile Insurance & Liability

In order to understand what the new law means for car wreck victims, it’s necessary to first understand that legal responsibility isn’t the same as insurance coverage. If an at-fault driver only has $25,000 bodily injury policy limits (the state-required minimum legal limits), then that is the most we can recover from their insurance. This is true even in catastrophic injury cases and no matter how high your damages are. So, if a jury awarded you $1 million in damages, you could only collect $25,000 from the at-fault driver.

However, if multiple defendants were at fault, then South Carolina applied what is known as modified joint and several liability. That meant a defendant could be held responsible for the entire judgment if either:

(A) They were more than 50% at fault, or
(B) Their conduct was reckless, intentional, or involved the use, sale, or possession of alcohol or drugs.

That defendant could then seek contribution (reimbursement) from the other at-fault parties for their share of the judgment.

The goal was to make sure the injured plaintiff got fully compensated first, with defendants sorting out reimbursements afterward.

Dram Shop Cases

This scenario often arose when bars and restaurants were put on the hook for a plaintiff’s total damages in dram shop cases. The purpose of Dram Shop liability is to “promote public safety, and to prevent an already intoxicated person from becoming even more intoxicated, and thus an even greater risk to the public at large when he leaves the establishment.” Tobias v. Sports Club, Inc. 332 S.C. 90 (1998). More often than not, drunk drivers carry a minimum liability insurance policy. However, if the drunk driver was over-served at a bar or restaurant, then the establishment could also be held liable for contributing to the wreck.

This made headlines when the SC Legislature unanimously passed a bill, which was signed into law by Gov. McMaster, requiring any business that sells alcohol after 5 PM to carry a minimum of $1 million in liquor liability insurance coverage. The law came about after a tragic 2014 car crash in which a 26-year-old woman was driving drunk and crashed into a police car driven by Dillon Police Officer Jacob Richardson. A passenger was killed; the officer was severely injured and suffered permanent brain damage. Officer Richardson’s medical bills exceeded $1 million. The drunk driver only had minimum policy limits ($25,000) and no assets. The bar that served her was uninsured.

The City of Dillon covered Officer Richardson’s medical bills. However, most victims of drunk driving aren’t officers with an employer to shoulder their medical bills when the at-fault driver and the establishment that served them alcohol are unable to cover their legal obligations. For many, such a situation could lead to financial ruin, with families forced into medical debt or even losing their homes.

This is why the law was so important. But, in turn, insurance companies began astronomically raising liquor liability insurance rates. The new law that goes into effect on January 1, 2026 reshaped the nearly decade-old law.

Key Changes

1. Insurance Coverage: The old law required bars/restaurants open after 5:00 PM to have at least $1 million in coverage. But it didn’t specify whether that limit applied per occurrence (each incident) or as an aggregate (for all claims in a year). This gave victims stronger protection but was also used by the insurance industry as a justification for raising premiums.

The new law requires an annual aggregate limit of $1 million. That means the most an insurance company will pay across all claims combined in a single policy year is $1 million. However, the law also requires that at least 50% of the aggregate ($500,000 on a $1 million policy) must be available for any singl claim. This ensures that a victim can’t be left with less than $500,000 in coverage, just because other claims were paid earlier in the year.

2. Liability Caps: The new law limits how much bars and restaurants can be required to pay in DUI cases involving both a drunk driver and a bar/restaurant. If both are on the verdict form, the bar can be held jointly and severally liable for no more than 50% of the victim’s actual damages, even if the jury assigns them a higher percentage of fault.

This is a major change from the prior law, which gave victims a stronger chance of being made whole. Before, a bar could be required to cover the victim’s full damages (up to its policy limits), after subtracting the drunk driver’s policy limits. The safety net that helped fill the gap when a drunk driver’s insurance coverage wasn’t enough is now gone under the new law.

3. Nonparties: The new law also gives defendants (and their insurers) a new tool. They now have the ability to add “nonparties” (people or entities not named in the lawsuit) to the verdict form. If the jury assigns fault to those nonparties, it will reduce the percentage of fault assigned to the actual defendants named in the case. Practically, this can be used to dilute a defendant’s liability to less than 50%, eliminating joint and several liability and limiting how much the victim can recover.

Multi-Vehicle Wrecks

While the new law is intended to act as a shield from liability for bars and restaurants, it will also have consequences for victims of chain-reaction crashes, even when alcohol isn’t a factor.

What’s the same?

• If a driver is less than 50% at fault, their insurance company only has to pay their share of damages.
• If a driver is more than 50% at fault, their insurance company may be required to pay more than their share of damages. That defendant can also still seek contribution (reimbursement) from the other at-fault parties for their share of the judgment.

What changed?

The new law created a wrinkle for multi-vehicle cases: Defendants now have the ability to place nonparties on the verdict form. This means the jury can assign a percentage of fault to someone who is not part of the lawsuit. This may keep the percentage of fault assigned to the actual defendants under the 50% threshold, insulating them from joint and several liability.

Hypothetical: Chain-Reaction Crash

Picture this: You’re stopped at a red light on Rivers Avenue in North Charleston when suddenly there’s a chain-reaction crash. Charlie is texting and never brakes. He slams into the middle car. Becky (middle car) is hit by Charlie and pushed forward, causing her to rear-end you. You’re the front car, completely stopped, innocent, and seriously injured. At trial, the jury finds:

• Charlie is 60% at fault.
• Becky is 40% at fault.
• Your damages total $150,000.

How this worked before the new law: Because Charlie was more than 50% liable, his insurance could be required to pay more than his share of your damages if Becky didn’t have enough coverage. Let’s say Becky had minimum policy limits ($25,000). Her insurance would pay you $25,000; if Charlie had $300,000 in liability coverage, then his policy would pay you $90,000 for his portion of your damages, plus an additional $35,000 to cover Becky’s unpaid share.

How this works under the new law (effective 1/1/26): The ≥50% fault rule still applies, but here’s the new wrinkle: Charlie (or, in reality, his insurance company) can now put a “nonparty” on the verdict form — someone who isn’t even part of the lawsuit. Suppose Charlie argues that another driver cut him off and shares 20% of the blame. If the jury buys that, Charlie’s share of fault drops from 60% to 40% — putting him below the 50% threshold, meaning he no longer faces joint and several liability. Becky’s insurance will still pay you $25,000 toward her share of liability, but now Charlie’s insurance only has to pay you $60,000 (his portion of fault). This means you will never be able to recover the other $65,000 the jury said you deserved.

👉 Bottom line: Your recovery now depends heavily on fault percentages. By shifting blame onto “nonparties,” insurers can protect their drivers from crossing the 50% line, leaving victims without full compensation.

Why UIM Coverage Matters More Than Ever

The changes to South Carolina’s liability laws make it even harder for crash victims to be fully compensated. When fault gets divided among multiple drivers or shifted to “nonparties,” it is easier for insurers to keep their share under the 50% threshold, avoiding joint and several liability for the full judgment.

That’s where underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage comes in. UIM coverage is part of your own auto insurance policy and steps in when the at-fault driver(s) don’t have enough insurance to cover your losses. Without it, you could be stuck with unpaid medical bills, lost wages, and other damages. With the new law in place, reviewing and strengthening your UIM coverage is one of the most important steps you can take to protect yourself and your family before a crash ever happens.

Need help understanding your coverage?
At Palmetto State Injury Lawyers, we’re always happy to sit down with anyone in our community to review auto insurance coverages. Sometimes just a quick look can make the difference between being left short after a crash and having the protection you need.

Our Promise to You

At Palmetto State Injury Lawyers, we study these changes so you don’t have to. We’ll explain how the law applies to your case, fight back when insurers try to dodge responsibility, and pursue every possible avenue for compensation.

📞 If you’ve been hurt in a South Carolina wreck—especially a DUI crash—call us today. We understand the new rules and we’re ready to stand up for you.