Given the task definition and input, reply with output. In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.

Maryland’s Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that adults can be held civilly responsible if they serve alcohol to a teen who gets hurt or hurts someone else. 
  
 Maryland's highest court ruled that adults who provide alcohol to minors can be held civilly responsible for the decisions made by those teenagers. The Maryland State House, seen here in May 2013, passed a bill in March to allow sentences up to one year for adults who serve alcohol to children or teens. 
  
 Maryland parents who provide alcohol to underage children can be held responsible if the underage drinker then is injured or hurts others, Maryland's highest court ruled Tuesday. 
  
 The decision differs from previous decisions Maryland's Court of Appeals had made regarding third-party responsibility for the actions of intoxicated individuals. Previous rulings had found that bar owners weren't responsible for the behavior of their drunk customers, but the new ruling stated that teenagers are unable to fully understand the consequences of their decisions, as the Baltimore Sun reported. 
  
 "Underage persons are not solely responsible for drinking alcohol on an adult's property because they are not competent to handle the effects of this potentially dangerous substance," Judge Sally D. Adkins wrote in the court's decision. 
  
 In order to be held responsible, the adult must "knowingly" and "willfully" provide alcohol to an underage person, The Washington Post reported. 
  
 The decision related to two recent cases in the state. In one of the cases, a woman was walking her dog in 2011 when she was hit by a car driven by an 18-year-old who had been drinking at a party where an adult had been mixing drinks. 
  
 In the other case, 17-year old Steven Dankos had gotten drunk in the garage of Linda Stapf's house before getting into the bed of a truck. The truck crashed, killing Steven. Ms. Stapf was believed to have provided the alcohol for the party. 
  
 "This is a wake-up call to the so-called cool parents who on Friday nights have their kids’ friends over and allow them to drink in their basements," Tim Maloney, the lawyer for Steven's mother, told the Post. 
  
 The decision comes after the state's General Assembly increased fines and jail times for adults who knowingly host parties where underage drinking takes place. The legislation was originally known as “Alex and Calvin’s Bill,” for two teens killed in June 2015 by a classmate who got drunk at a party where a parent was present. 
  
 Despite some parents' rationale that it is safe to allow teens to drink at home where they can keep an eye on them, the only safe approach for underage people is abstaining from alcohol, said Lisa Spicknall, director of the Maryland branch of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. 
  
 "Reality shows that children die each and every day in impaired driving crashes caused by underage drinkers leaving parties that are hosted by parents," she said. 
  
 The appeals court decided the "knowingly and willfully" wording of the criminal law against hosting underage drinkers should apply in civil cases as well as criminal ones, as parents whose children host a party when they aren't home or sneak alcohol into the house will likely not be held legally responsible. 
  
 Mr. Maloney said he believed the rulings would have a long-term impact. 
  
 "This has become almost an epidemic in some areas of the state," Maloney told the Sun. "I think this is really going to change the social consciousness of parents throughout the state." ||||| So-called "cool parents" who knowingly let teens host boozy parties at their homes now run the risk of being sued if an underage drinker gets hurt or hurts someone else, Maryland's highest court ruled Tuesday. 
  
 The Court of Appeals has generally been reluctant to hold third parties such as bar owners responsible for the actions of drunken people, but said in Tuesday's opinion that the law ought to be different when children are involved. 
  
 "Underage persons are not solely responsible for drinking alcohol on an adult's property because they are not competent to handle the effects of this potentially dangerous substance," Judge Sally D. Adkins wrote for the court. 
  
 For two decades, it has been a crime in Maryland for adults to allow underage drinking at their homes. Tuesday's ruling adds another potential layer of legal accountability for parents who let teens get drunk and brings Maryland into line with at least 31 states that have similar laws covering civil cases. 
  
 Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the two cases covered by the Court of Appeals opinion called it a groundbreaking step, and activists against underage drinking said the ruling will help dissuade adults from providing alcohol to minors. 
  
 "The criminal penalty has been on the books for a while, and it still happens," said Adam P. Janet, an attorney for a plaintiff in one of the cases. "This is one more disincentive." 
  
 In 2013, the controversy over how parents should approach their teenage children's interest in drinking engulfed Maryland's then-attorney general, Douglas F. Gansler. The Baltimore Sun obtained pictures of Gansler at a rented vacation house in Delaware, surrounded by teens in the middle of a raging party. He initially said he had no reason to intervene, but later said he had handled the situation poorly. 
  
 While some parents might think they are keeping teens safer by letting them drink at home where adults can keep an eye on things, Lisa Spicknall, director of the Maryland branch of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said the group believes alcohol abstinence for underage people is the only safe approach. 
  
 "Reality shows that children die each and every day in impaired driving crashes caused by underage drinkers leaving parties that are hosted by parents," she said. 
  
 The Maryland court's ruling covered two similar cases. The first, from Howard County, involved 17-year-old Steven Dankos, who got drunk at a party at a friend's house in 2009 and then got a ride in a pickup truck with a 22-year-old man who also was drunk. The driver got into a crash and Dankos was killed. 
  
 Dankos' mother sued Linda Stapf, the woman in whose home the party was held. According to court documents, Stapf's house was known among students at River Hill High School as a "party house" and teens went there to drink almost every weekend. 
  
 Timothy F. Maloney, a lawyer for Dankos' mother, said his client wanted to discourage other parents from holding parties for underage drinkers. 
  
 "This has become almost an epidemic in some areas of the state," Maloney said. "I think this is really going to change the social consciousness of parents throughout the state." 
  
 The other case, from Baltimore County, was brought by Manal Kiriakos, a woman who was out walking her dogs when she was hit by an 18-year-old who had been drinking at the home of a man he worked with. Kiriakos suffered severe injuries that required spinal surgery and left her in severe pain, according to her attorneys. 
  
 "The Court of Appeals recognized what we all know: Individuals that are underage lack the judgment and competence to decide whether to drink," said Janet, who represented Kiriakos. 
  
 The Court of Appeals rulings are not the final verdict in the two cases. The judges sent both back to the trial courts for further consideration. Lawyers for the defendants in the cases could not be reached for comment. 
  
 The issue of who can be held responsible when a drunken person gets into an accident or hurts someone has come before the court in other contexts. The Court of Appeals recently ruled that bar owners generally cannot be sued over the actions of their drunken customers. 
  
 Adkins wrote that normally the court follows the rule that people, whether they're drunk or sober, are responsible for their own conduct. "But this rule does not extend to the circumstances here — an underage person consuming alcohol on the adult's property with the adult's complicity," she wrote. 
  
 The appeals judges looked to the wording of the criminal law against hosting underage drinkers, which prohibits adults from "knowingly and willfully" letting drinking go on. The judges concluded that the same standard should apply in civil suits, so parents whose children sneak into their home with alcohol would likely not be held responsible in court. 
  
 The criminal law also has an exception for people who let members of their family drink at home. While that issue did not come up in the cases considered by the appeals court, it is likely that the caveat would also apply in civil cases, lawyers said. 
  
 Steve Klepper, an attorney who runs a blog covering the Court of Appeals, noted that the new ruling sticks closely to the language in the criminal law. Klepper said that means it probably will not open up avenues for people who provide alcohol under other circumstances to be found responsible in civil cases. 
  
 "At a gut level, it feels like a departure from earlier cases that have refused to recognize liability for bars," he said. "But on the other hand, the court was able to limit its rationale." 
  
 iduncan@baltsun.com 
  
 twitter.com/iduncan ||||| Adults who provide alcohol to underage drinkers can be held civilly liable for any death or harm that comes to others at the hands of the young people they hosted, according to an opinion Maryland’s highest court issued Tuesday. 
  
 The opinion sets a legal precedent in Maryland and comes after the state’s General Assembly grappled with how to toughen criminal penalties for adults who host underage drinking parties. 
  
 The ruling from the Maryland Court of Appeals holds that adults should be responsible for the actions of the underage drinkers they host because those under 21 aren’t competent to handle the potentially dangerous effects of alcohol. 
  
 “Children under 21 are often less able to make responsible decisions regarding the consumption of alcohol and, as a result, are more susceptible to harming themselves or others when presented with the opportunity to drink in excess in a social, peer-pressured setting,” the court wrote. . “The adult increases the risk of harm to themselves and others by facilitating the improper conduct of another.” 
  
 [Teen driver in deadly Maryland crash pleads guilty; car was airborne 110 feet] 
  
 According to the decision, Tuesday marks the first time the Court of Appeals has recognized in Maryland law what is known as “social host liability” — a term that refers to those who negligently serve alcohol and are then subject to the consequences. The adult must “knowingly” and “willfully” furnish the alcohol to someone under 21 in order to be held culpable, the court ruled. 
  
 The appeals ruling stems from two cases. In Manal Kiriakos v. Brandon Phillips, the court said that Kiriakos was walking her dog when an 18-year-old struck her with an SUV in 2011. The teen had been drinking at Phillips’s home in Baltimore County and Phillips had been mixing drinks, the court stated. Kiriakos sued, saying Phillips should not have provided alcohol to someone underage who would later drive under the influence. 
  
 In Nancy Dankos, et al. v. Linda Stapf, the court said that Dankos’s 17-year-old son got drunk in the garage of Stapf’s Howard County home in 2009 and got in the bed of a pickup truck with an intoxicated partygoer at the wheel. The truck — full of current and former football players from River Hill High School — crashed, killing Dankos. Dankos sued Stapf, saying she was responsible for the death for allowing the teen to get so intoxicated he couldn’t make a smart decision getting in the truck. 
  
 [How a bill to fight underage drinking got watered down] 
  
 “This is a wake-up call to the so-called cool parents who on Friday nights have their kids’ friends over and allow them to drink in their basements,” said Tim Maloney, the attorney representing Dankos. “This has been an epidemic in some communities when these kids go out and get behind the wheel and someone pays the price.” 
  
 The Court of Appeals opinion returns the cases to circuit courts in Howard and Baltimore counties for new proceedings on the lawsuits. 
  
 This spring, the Maryland legislature passed a bill that stiffens fines and jail time for adults who provide alcohol to underage drinkers. The bill was named for Alex Murk and Calvin Li, two 18-year-olds from Montgomery County who died in a car crash after an underage drinking party where a teen’s father was in the house. |||||

In what one attorney calls a "wake-up call to the so-called cool parents," Maryland adults who provide alcohol to underage kids can be held legally responsible if those kids harm themselves or others, the Washington Post reports. According to the Baltimore Sun, adults in Maryland could already be criminally charged with providing alcohol to minors, but Tuesday's ruling from the state's Court of Appeals adds—in the words of another lawyer—"one more disincentive" to parents thinking about letting their kids and their kids' friends drink at their home. “Underage persons are not solely responsible for drinking alcohol on an adult's property because they are not competent to handle the effects of this potentially dangerous substance," the Christian Science Monitor quotes the court's decision as saying. The ruling stems from two recent cases. In one, an 18-year-old driver hit a woman walking her dog after drinking at a party where an adult was tending bar. In another, a 17-year-old got into a fatal crash after drinking alcohol believed to have been provided by an adult. A MADD executive director praised Tuesday's ruling, saying it's a myth that underage drinking with a parent's supervision is safe; the only safety comes from not letting kids drink at all. In order for an adult to be held legally responsible, they must have "knowingly" and "willfully" provided alcohol to people who are under 21. More than 30 other states have similar laws on the books.