2 Injured in Alleged Drunk Driver Accident on Rivers Avenue in North Charleston, SC

North Charleston, SC — July 13, 2025, two people were injured in an alleged drunk driving accident at about 10:30 p.m. on Rivers Avenue.

Authorities said a speeding red Fiat crashed into a Toyota Avalon near Greenridge Road, sending the other vehicle rolling down the road. The Fiat, which burst into flames after the crash, had its speedometer stuck at 100 mph.

Two women, a 26-year-old and a 21-year-old, in the Toyota were hospitalized in critical condition after the crash, according to authorities. Their names have not been made public yet.

The driver of the Fiat has been charged with reckless driving and two counts of driving under the influence with great bodily injury.

Authorities have not released any additional information about the North Charleston crash at this time.

Commentary by Attorney Michael Grossman

When I read about incidents like this one, what stands out to me isn’t just what happened, but what’s missing from the conversation. It’s easy to focus on the immediate driver-related charges — and to be clear, they’re serious — but rarely do reports ask what led up to that person getting behind the wheel. If someone was allegedly intoxicated and driving 100 mph through a city street, it raises a deeper question: Where did they come from, and who allowed them to leave that way?

One of the most important but often overlooked questions in cases like this is, “Where did the driver get their alcohol?” South Carolina, like Texas, has laws that hold alcohol providers accountable when they serve someone who’s clearly intoxicated and then that person causes serious harm. If an investigation shows that an establishment overserved the alleged drunk driver before this crash, the injured parties may have grounds to hold that business legally responsible under dram shop liability.

These laws exist to prevent exactly this kind of harm, because while personal responsibility is central, it’s not the only factor. The law recognizes that the person handing over that last drink to someone obviously intoxicated plays a role too. But unless someone asks the right questions and takes the time to look behind the scenes, that responsibility can easily go unnoticed.

When I think back to the start of this reflection, what’s missing from the conversation, I’m reminded that accountability isn’t always as obvious as the headlines suggest. Legal remedies may exist for those affected, but they’re only available if someone knows to look for them.

Key Takeaways:

1. Dram shop laws are designed to hold alcohol providers accountable when they overserve someone who’s already clearly intoxicated.
2. Full investigations should consider not just who was behind the wheel, but where they were drinking beforehand and whether signs of obvious intoxication were ignored.
3. Many people don’t realize they have the right to explore these issues legally, even though the law provides tools for exactly this kind of situation.