Marie Kelly sued the Zaks after she was injured in a headon collision. The Automobile that hit her was driven by Donald Gwinnell. Donald had been at the

Zaks’ home immediately before the accident and had been served a large

amount of alcohol by the Zaks. The Zaks then allowed Donald to drive himself

home during which time he struck the car driven by Marie Kelly. If state law

does not impose liability on the Zaks for Donald’s acts, can the courts hold them

liable for Kelly’s injuries? Why or why not? [Kelly v. Grinnell, 476 A. 2d 1219

(N. J.1984)]