Young v. Warren
383 S.E.2d 381 (1989)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The affirmative defense of 'defense of a family member' is only available when the defendant has a well-grounded belief that an assault is imminently about to be committed against the family member, and it does not justify the use of force once the aggressor is retreating and the threat is no longer immediate.
Facts:
- Lewis Reid Young, who was dating William S. Warren's daughter, went to her home in the early morning hours.
- Young threw a large piece of wood through the glass in the front door, reached through, unlocked the door, and entered the home.
- Inside the house, Young argued with Warren's daughter and jerked her arm.
- Warren, having been alerted by a neighbor, arrived at his daughter's house with a loaded shotgun and heard screaming.
- Warren confronted Young and told him to get out of the house.
- Young complied, walked out the front door, and stepped onto the porch with his back to Warren.
- While Young was on the porch and turned away, Warren, who was standing a few feet behind him, prodded Young with the shotgun.
- The shotgun discharged, striking Young in the back at close range and killing him.
Procedural Posture:
- William S. Warren pled guilty to involuntary manslaughter in a criminal proceeding for the death of Lewis Reid Young.
- The estate of Lewis Reid Young (plaintiff) filed a civil wrongful death action against William S. Warren (defendant) in the trial court.
- At trial, the jury returned a verdict finding that Warren was negligent but that he acted in the lawful defense of his family.
- Pursuant to the jury's verdict, the trial court entered a final judgment denying any recovery for the plaintiff.
- The plaintiff appealed the trial court's judgment to the intermediate court of appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the affirmative defense of 'defense of family' apply to justify the use of deadly force when the alleged aggressor is outside the family's home, retreating with their back to the defendant, and no longer poses an immediate threat of harm to the family members inside?
Opinions:
Majority - Greene, J.
No. The affirmative defense of 'defense of family' does not apply because the privilege to use such force ceases once the threat is no longer immediate. To assert the defense, a defendant must have a well-grounded belief that an assault is about to be committed on a family member. The court found that at the time of the shooting, Lewis Reid Young was outside the house with his back to William S. Warren, and Warren's daughter and grandchildren were inside, removed from any likely harm. As the necessity for the defense must be immediate and attacks in the past do not justify the privilege, the evidence did not support submitting the issue to the jury. The court also held that, procedurally, the defense was improperly submitted because Warren had not pleaded it as an affirmative defense as required by court rules.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the strict temporal limitations on the affirmative defense of 'defense of family' in tort actions. It clarifies that the privilege is not a license for retaliation but is strictly confined to situations of immediate and ongoing peril. The court's holding establishes that once an aggressor ceases threatening behavior and begins to retreat, the legal justification for using force, particularly deadly force, evaporates. This precedent requires future courts to closely scrutinize the timeline of events to determine the precise moment a threat ceases, thereby limiting the availability of the defense to only those actions taken to repel an imminent attack.
Unlock the full brief for Young v. Warren