A Georgia-based smoke shop chain is facing a wrongful-death lawsuit after a man allegedly drove high on nitrous oxide and caused a fatal crash that killed an elderly cyclist. The incident occurred in March when 78-year-old Charles “Chuck” Johnson was struck by a car driven by Joseph Tillman, 24, who was reportedly inhaling nitrous oxide from a can of Galaxy Gas while behind the wheel. Johnson, who was riding an e-bike on the sidewalk, was wearing a helmet at the time but died from his injuries a week after the accident.
The lawsuit, filed by Johnson’s widow, Regina Johnson, claims that the manufacturers of Galaxy Gas and the chain of smoke shops that sold the product were responsible for her husband’s death. The legal action alleges that the defendants knew the nitrous oxide would be misused as a recreational drug, despite the product being marketed with a disclaimer that it was intended for culinary purposes only.
According to the lawsuit, Tillman purchased the can of Galaxy Gas from a Cloud 9 Smoke and Vape shop less than an hour before the fatal crash. Johnson’s attorneys argue that Tillman was “huffing nitrous oxide straight out of the Galaxy Gas can” while driving, which led to him losing control of the vehicle and running into Johnson. The lawsuit asserts that the sale of nitrous oxide for non-culinary purposes is illegal and that the smoke shop chain knowingly violated this law by selling the product to Tillman.
The attorneys representing the Johnson family claim that the smoke shop chain and the manufacturers of Galaxy Gas were fully aware that the product was being used for recreational inhalation, particularly among young people. One of the attorneys, Alan Hamilton, argued that the sale of the product for culinary purposes was a mere legal cover, and that the intent behind the sale was clearly to cater to the demand for nitrous oxide for recreational use. Another attorney, Kyle Wallace, emphasized that the sale of nitrous oxide for non-culinary purposes is a felony, and that the defendants should be held accountable for their role in the tragedy.
The lawsuit also points out that Cloud 9 Smoke Co. and SBK International, the parent company of the smoke shop chain, had the same principal address as Galaxy Gas and were connected through their business operations. This connection is significant because it suggests that the companies were aware of the demand for nitrous oxide as a recreational drug and were profiting from it.
In response to the lawsuit, the attorney representing the companies, Chris Timmons, denied any wrongdoing. He stated that neither Cloud 9 Smoke Co. nor SBK International ever marketed or sold nitrous oxide for unlawful use. Timmons further emphasized that both companies had taken immediate action to remove Galaxy Gas products from their shelves after videos surfaced on social media showing individuals misusing the product. He also argued that the companies cannot be held responsible for how individuals choose to use the product outside of its intended culinary purpose.
Despite the companies’ defense, the lawsuit argues that their actions directly contributed to the misuse of nitrous oxide and the tragic death of Charles Johnson. The Johnson family’s legal team contends that the companies knew or should have known that the product would be abused, and that they should be held accountable for their role in promoting the recreational use of nitrous oxide.
Joseph Tillman, the driver accused of causing the fatal crash, has been charged with multiple offenses, including two counts of first-degree vehicular homicide, homicide by vehicle, leaving the scene, driving under the influence, felony hit-and-run, reckless driving, and making false statements. He is currently out on bond and is scheduled to be arraigned in January 2025.
This lawsuit highlights the growing concern over the misuse of nitrous oxide, often referred to as “whippets,” for recreational purposes. The case also raises questions about the responsibility of businesses that sell products intended for legitimate uses but are often misused by consumers. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the regulation of nitrous oxide sales and the legal responsibilities of retailers in preventing the misuse of their products.
