HAMPTON COUNTY, S.C. (Court TV) – A South Carolina judge has denied a motion from a convenience store requesting a summary judgment on a wrongful death lawsuit stemming from a boat accident involving convicted killer Alex Murdaugh‘s son.
Alex Murdaugh sentenced to life in prison after conviction in double murder trial during his sentencing at the Colleton County Courthouse in Walterboro, S.C., on Friday, March 3, 2023 after he was found guilty on all four counts. (Andrew J. Whitaker/The Post And Courier via AP, Pool)
Paul Murdaugh was indicted before his death on charges he was drunk while driving a boat that crashed, killing Mallory Beach in 2019. Before Murdaugh was tried on the charges, he was shot and killed by his father, Alex Murdaugh, who was also convicted for the murder of his wife and Paul’s mother, Maggie.
WATCH: Mallory Beach’s Family Attorney Speaks to Court TV
A wrongful death lawsuit filed in March 2019 named the Murdaugh family and the convenience store, Parkers, which sold Paul the alcohol.
On Monday, the court denied the store’s request for summary judgment, saying that based on depositions, interrogatories and other evidentiary material, “The parties have provided an ample record on which the Court relies to deny the Motion for Summary Judgment.” The ruling means the case will proceed to trial, scheduled for August.
Mallory Beach attended a party hosted at the home of Kristy and James Wood on Feb. 23, 2019, where she and other minors allegedly drank alcohol, the lawsuit alleges. Beach then left the party with other minors, including Paul Murdaugh, and drove a boat to a bar where they continued drinking. After leaving the bar, the boat crashed into a bridge, throwing Mallory from the vessel and killing her.
Attorneys representing Alex Murdaugh filed a motion asking the Court to reconsider its ruling to allow him to use accounts to pay his legal bills. Judge Daniel Hall froze Murdaugh’s accounts, in part because the Beach family’s lawsuit accuses the disgraced attorney of hiding millions of dollars. In their motion, Murdaugh’s attorneys said the Court denied their previous motion “without any explanation of the basis for the ruling” and failed to consider and rule on the specific arguments Murdaugh made.
READ MORE: Alex Murdaugh’s crime saga timeline: Murder, fraud, death and betrayal
Murdaugh’s attorneys claim the funds in the receivership at question, which includes more than $160,000 in untainted funds, belong to Murdaugh and that he has a constitutional right to access the money to pay for his legal representation.
