Printer Friendly

The likelihood of liability.

AS SOCIETY BECOMES MORE PRIVATIZED, the need increases for quality private protection. The often-cited Hallcrest Report suggests that security has a major role in public safety, but one with less visibility and fanfare than public law enforcement. The privatization of protection services results from increasing demands by businesses and the public for safety, along with the realization that public law enforcement cannot respond to all public safety needs.

Trends show that private protection employment-private police, detectives, guards, and other security workers-is increasing at a higher rate than public law enforcement employment and will continue to do so despite unfavorable economic forecasts. Service industries such as health care, lodging, and entertainment will continue to require a higher quality of protection. Also, as long as drugs and associated violence permeate our society, a need exists to protect not only public areas but also the workplace.

According to Shearing and Stenning, the growth of commercial and private property has facilitated an ongoing privatization of social orders supervised by an assortment of private protectors. Thus, America is experiencing a form of "feudalism" characterized by huge tracts of property being protected by private security personnel.'

This growth is also creating an increase in civil litigation, suggesting a need for increased accountability. Inadequate or illusionary protection practices by security operators or other businesses can result in serious legal consequences. It is these legal outcomes that can affect how private protection practices will be conducted in the future.

This article examines the sources and outcomes of civil cases initiated against commercial purveyors. To fully appreciate the legal implications of negligent security practices, take a look at the 82 cases presented in Exhibit 1. The cases represent case judgments and settlements appearing in the Association of Trial Lawyers of America Law Reporter from 1984 through 1988.

Many cases result in judgments for the defendant or dismissals or are otherwise screened from the system. However, this research focuses on judgments or settlements favoring plaintiffs in an attempt to show the sources of business negligence. The cases mentioned here come from 22 states, with most occurring in California, Texas, Florida, and New York.

The suits are against commercial entities for failure to provide adequate security from third-party criminal attacks against business invitees or employees. In some cases, verdicts or settlements are not recorded because of pending appeals or undisclosed settlements. However, the case information suggests that the courts are sending a message that inadequate or lax security practices will not be tolerated.

In other words, private protection involves more than just hiring guards or using physical barriers. Private protectors must follow sound business practices, incorporating knowledge of the protected environment and other security considerations.

TO ESTABLISH A CLAIM FOR INADEquate security, the plaintiff must prove that the business had a duty or standard is taken from Part 8 of the California Jury Instructions, which addresses an owner's, occupant's, or lessor's knowledge of defective condition:

Concerning owner's, occupant's, or lessor's knowledge of defective condition-The [owner] [occupant] [lessor] of premises is not liable for an injury suffered by a person on his premises which resulted from a dangerous or defective condition of which the [owner] [occupant] [lessor] had no knowledge, unless the condition existed for such a length of time that if the [owner] [occupant] [lessor] had exercised reasonable care in inspecting the premises he would have discovered the condition in time to remedy it or to give warning before the injury occurred.

Nor may the [owner] [occupant] [lessor] be held liable if, having exercised ordinary care, he discovered such a condition before the time of the injury, but not long enough before to provide him the time reasonably necessary to remedy the condition or to give reasonable warning or to provide reasonable protection.

As indicated in the instruction, the owner must have had prior knowledge of a dangerous condition to be found liable. Prior invitee complaints and premises crimes can serve as evidence of prior knowledge. Obvious security hazards such as defective locks and faulty lighting can further raise the issue of foreseeability.

The 82 cases represent a variety of business premises. Practically all the cases involve offenses committed against invitees or tenants. These cases indicate that the threat of criminal attack can occur in any environment. Parking lots, hallways, restrooms, and a person's own home can be the scene of a violent crime. At issue is the reasonableness of security or protection provided by the premises manager, owner, or security provider.

Of the 82 incidents, 39 (48 percent) occurred on residential property such as condominiums and apartments; 12 (15 percent) in commercial establishments; nine (11 percent) in parking lots; five (6 percent) in food, beverage, and entertainment establishments; four (5 percent) in health care businesses; and 13 (16 percent) in an assortment of other businesses.

Six prominent negligent security issues were present in many of the cases: negligent hiring, negligent training, negligent supervision, inadequate physical security, inadequate human security presence, and history of prior crimes. For instance, approximately 21 percent of the incidents resulted from the negligent hiring of unfit employees. In 32 cases, evidence of prior criminal activity on the premises existed, meaning in 39 percent of the cases felonies, assaults, or other crimes had previously occurred on the property.

Negligent training and supervision accounted for about 25 percent of the litigation, while inadequate physical security measures were sources of negligence for more than 40 percent of the cases. The single largest source of litigation cited in the case files was a lack of human security presence. In other words, in nearly half the cases businesses were found to have no security officers or too few to effectively protect the environment.

JUDGMENT AND SETTLEMENT DATA ARE presented in Exhibit 2. More than $41 million was awarded to plaintiffs for injuries. The judgments ranged from $40,000 to $5 million with an average of $889,941. Settlements ranged from $75,000 to $1.1 million with an average of $249,307. Court judgments exceeded out-of-court settlements by approximately $5 million.

The two largest awards were jury verdicts in cases involving negligent security practices by apartment owners. It appears from this study that higher plaintiff awards occur through trial. It is also interesting to note that only a few civil cases resulted in trial. As with the criminal plea-bargaining process, civil cases are frequently abandoned or settled without any court involvement.

Violent premises crimes do not always guarantee plaintiff relief in subsequent civil actions. If no evidence of past crimes or security breaches exists, a plaintiff may have difficulty in seeking redress. Generally, the plaintiff must show that the business owner had notice of unreasonable security conditions or the premises had a history of crime.

In Lopez v. McDonald's et al.,(3) survivors and surviving family members brought suit against McDonald's Corporation for negligent security. The plaintiffs provided evidence that the restaurant was located in a high-crime area with nearby incidents of violent crimes and gang activity. Employee requests for uniformed security were refused by management. When 25 people were killed and 1 1 others wounded by a crazed gunman, a flurry of suits followed. However, in holding for the defendant, the court said that reasonable security measures might have deterred ordinary criminals but not those of a crazed, suicidal nature.

In a Pennsylvania appellate case, a pizza delivery man was robbed and assaulted at the entry gate to a private hospital. Although a security guard was absent from the gate, the court ruled in favor of the defendants-the security firm and hospital-since there was no evidence of prior crimes or threats of violence to either hospital employees or invitees. Testimony from an expert witness for the plaintiff about the need for more lighting, fencing, and CCTV did not influence the court's ruling (Kerns v. Methodist Hospital). (4)

In a sexual assault case concerning an apartment tenant, an Illinois court ruled that a landlord had no "special relationship" in repairing broken locks. In this case, an intruder entered the apartment building through a rear door, The door had a broken lock, which the landlord was aware of. However, the defense successfully argued that the intruder could have entered from another door or could have been another tenant or guest of another tenant. The lack of prior criminal activity at the apartment complex was further noted by the court (N.W. v. Amalgamated Trust and Savings').

PRIVATE PROTECTION CAN ONLY BE AS effective as resources allow. The first step in organizing a security plan is the employment of quality security managers or the use of recognized consultants. Security protection management requires persons with proactive visions who understand the law, perimeter protection, crime prevention analysis, health and safety, and so forth.

The cases presented in this article represent a sampling of security errors resulting from management ignorance. Civil liability cannot be totally avoided, yet jury awards or settlements can be reduced, or won, if businesses assume a more proactive security posture. The level of security provided depends on both internal and external threats. It may be possible, for example, for two businesses belonging to the same chain to have different threats depending on such factors as the area crime profile, business size, and configuration. Thus, the test of reasonable security is not what other businesses provide or do not provide but the security needs of a particular business.

Security managers must plan for criminal intrusions. One method of planning is to conduct a security analysis of the environment. This can include crime analysis, employee interviews regarding security or safety needs, and site inspections. If there is knowledge of criminal activity on the premises, business or security managers must share that information in order to warn unsuspecting persons. Withholding crime information and allowing lax security practices are not tolerable in today's society.

About the Author . . . Robert J. Meadows, PhD, CPP, is an associate professor of sociology and administration of justice at California Lutheran University in Thousand Oaks, CA. He is a premises liability consultant and expert witness, and he is a member of ASIS.

(1) C. D. Shearing and R. C. Stenning, "Private Security: Implications for Social Control," Social Problems, Vol. 30, No. 5, 1983, pp. 493-506.

(2) Barry Mahoney, Changing Times in Trial Courts (Denver: National Center for State Courts, 1988).

(3) Lopez v. McDonalds et al., 238 CA 436, (1987).

(4) Kerns v. Methodist et al., 574 A.2d.1068 1990).

(5) N. W. v. Amalgamated Trust and Savings Bank, 554 N.E.2d.629 (1990).

Exhibit 1

Cases Studied

Note: This exhibit contains information about the cases referred to throughout the accompanying article. Each listing follows this order: type of premises or business; type of incident or injury; civil liability issues; and case disposition (judgment or settlement). in addition, the case citations are given in parentheses after each listing.

1. Apartment complex; tenant rape; poor lighting in parking lot; settlement, 0,000. (Roe v. Presidential Realty Corp., US District Court No. N82447)

2. Service station; wrongful death; negligent hiring and retention of unfit employee; settlement, $127,500. (Davis v. Clark Oil, St. Louis City Circuit Court, No. 802-02964)

3. Apartment; tenant rape; no window locks, poor lighting; settlement, $200,000. (Paulsen v. Lyon, Washington, Pierce County N-82-2-04 360-1)

4. Tavern; patron assault; no security, prior violence; judgment, $100,000. (Allen v. Batsrab, 438 So.2d 356)

5. Commercial building; wrongful death; negligent hiring, unfit employee; settlement, $600,000. (Schwartz v. Bay Ridge A.R. Right, USDC New York, No. Civ. 74C359)

6. Apartment building; tenant rape; negligent hiring of unfit employee, prior crimes; judgment, $1.5 million. (Keyes v. Dalewood Assoc., USDC New York, No. 81-Civ. 162)

7. Apartment building; tenant rape; inadequate locks, prior robberies in building; settlement, $250,000. (Martin v. Marso Realty Corp., New York Supreme Ct. No. 15233/81)

8. Apartment building; tenant rape; negligent hiring, negligent supervision of duplicate keys; settlement, $375,000. (Karsk v. Suburban Bank, Maryland, No. 64396)

9. Gambling casino (restroom); robbery, assault of patron; negligent security supervision and training, lack of policy, prior crimes; no judgment or settlement available. (Early v. N.I.V. Casino Corp., 678 P.2d 683)

10. Apartment basement; rape, assault, robbery of tenant; inadequate security, poor locks, prior crimes; settlement. $600,000. (Dillon v. Windsor Park Apartments, New York, No. 18468-1983)

11. Parking lot of college campus; attempted student rape; inadequate security, excessive foliage; no judgment or settlement available. (Peterson v. San Francisco Community College District, 685 P.2d 1193)

12. Office building garage; assault, robbery of employee; inadequate security, no parking attendant; judgment, $87,500. (Pearson v. Allright Inc., Texas, Harris Co. 151st Judicial Dist. Ct. No. 81-11194,3/84)

13. Convenience store; wrongful death of patron; inadequate security and employee training, prior robberies in store chain; judgment, 87,834. (Holton v. L'il Champ Food Stores, Florida, Duval Co. Circ. Ct. No. 81-7692-CA)

14. Movie theater parking lot; wrongful death of patron; inadequate security, prior criminal incidents; judgment, $451,641. (Silva v. Showcase Cinemas, F.2d, 1st Cir., 6/84)

15. Apartment building; sexual assault, robbery of tenant; inadequate security and access control; settlement, 146,000. (Rosa v. Tribby Real Estate, inc., USDC DDC, No. 82-2170, 2/84)

16. Apartment; tenant rape, assault; negligent hiring of unfit employee; settlement, $325,000 plus lifetime annual payments ranging from $12,000 to $67,398, guaranteed for 20 years, plus periodic lump sum payments totaling $450,000. (Allison v. Herman Management & Investment Co., Texas, Tarrant County District Ct., No. 342-75424-82, 8/84)

17. Airport parking lot; robbery, assault, sexual abuse; negligent hiring, failure to investigate criminal background or prior conviction, prior crimes; settlement, $951,000 plus $10,000 for loss of consortium to plaintiff's husband. (Kanne v. Burns International Security Services, inc., California, Los Angeles Co. Superior Ct., No. SWC 61883, 5/84)

18. Hospital hallway; wrongful death; negligent refusal to allow po lice to keep arrestee handcuffed, in adequate security policy; judgment, $1.76 million. (Walker v. St. Vincent's Hospital, New York Co. Supreme Ct. No. 22478/77, 7/84)

19. Parking garage; assault on patron; inadequate security and safety precautions, prior criminal activity, inadequate lighting, no controlled access to garage, no security guards, patrons not warned of danger; settlement, $240,946. (Lowell v. Locksley Associates, Massachusetts, Suffolk Superior Ct., No. 53955, 5/ 84)

20. Apartment building; tenant rape; vacant apartment unit structure decay and disrepair, owner and manager breached duty of care, prior similar crimes; no judgment or settlement available. (Nixon v. Mr. Property Management Co. Inc., Texas, 690 S.W.2d 546)

21. Hospital grounds; patient rape; inadequate security and use of security guards, failure to evaluate dangerous person on the premises, failure to warn hospital patrons of known prior crimes committed on property; judgment, $720,000. (Landy v. Parkway Regional Medical Center Inc., Florida, Dade Co. Circ. Ct., No. 83-38063, 7/85)

22. Apartment; tenant rape, assault; inadequate security, prior criminal incidents; settlement, $450,000. (Mason v. Washington Devaho Inc., Colorado, Denver Co. District Ct. No. 84 CV 9349, 8/85)

23. Retail business; wrongful death; negligent hiring, inadequate training and supervision of guard; settlement, 500,000. (Duarte v. A. J. Bayless inc., Arizona, Maricopa Co. Superior Ct. No. 480320, 8/85)

24. Commercial building-mall office; assault; inadequate security, understaff ed, inadequate policy governing mall security; settlement, S235,000. (Lemar v. AA. Carozza Co., Maryland, Prince George's Co. Circuit Ct., No. 83-2230, 8/85)

25. Commercial building-mall store; abduction, rape, assault with deadly weapon, battery; inadequate security, understaffed; judgment, $780,000. (Hughes v. Jardel Co., Delaware, New Castle Co. Superior Ct. No. 82-C-JL-38, 2/85)

26. Condominium; rape, sexual abuse; inadequate security; settlement, Si.5 million, 100,000 paid by security company. (Segerstrom v. Sultan Development Co., Texas, Dallas Co. 192d Judicial District Ct. No. 84-11 539-K, 8/85)

27. Restaurant; robbery, murder; inadequate security, prior robberies, understaffed; settlement, $733,339 plus lump sum periodic payments totaling $495,000. (Marlin v. Norm's Restaurants inc., California, Los Angeles Superior Ct., No. WEC 67037, 10/85)

28. Gas station; shooting, robbery; inadequate security measures; settlement, $300,000. (Gross v. Guff Oil Co., USDC DDC No. 84-3462, 1/ 86)

29. Common carrier-public bus; criminal attack (harassment of passengers by juveniles); failure by driver to take precautionary measures to protect endangered passengers; no judgment or settlement available. (Lopez v. Southern Cal. Rapid Transit Dist. 40, California, 3d 780, 221 Cal. Rptr. 840, 710 P.2d 907,1985) 30. Department store; Brinks robbery, murder; negligence in failing to inform security personnel of Brink's schedule, inadequately trained staff; judgment, $442,500. (Martinez v. Ohrbach's Inc., California, Torrance Co. Superior Ct., No. SWC 599, 1/86)

31. Shopping center; employee rape; negligent hiring, failure to do background check on janitor (a convicted sexual offender), failure to provide daytime security; settlement, $812,500. (Christenson v. Larimer Square Associates, Colorado, Denver District Ct. No. 84CV9172, 3/86)

32. Apartment building; assault, false report of suicide attempt; inadequate security, prior crimes and loss of investors' financial support; judgment, $5 million. Valenza v. Fetton, New York, New York Co. Supreme Ct. No. 185690/85, 5/86)

33. University dormitory; assault; negligence by university for locking entrance at 10 pm with dimly lit side entrance only alternative, not having adequate security patrols; judgment, $400,000 plus $177,000 delay damages. (Lewis v. University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Ct. of Common Pleas, No. 81-4471, 5/86)

34. Condominium; rape, robbery; poor lighting in condominium project, prior crime wave. causal negligence; no judgment or settlement available. (Frances T. v. Village Green Owners Assn., California, 723 P.2d 573,1986)

35. Apartment complex; tenant assault, rape; inadequate security, gross negligence, failure to control use and custody of master keys; settlement, $500,000. (Ryan v. McNeil Corp., Texas, Galveston Co. 122d Judicial District Ct. No. 84 CV 0355, 6/86)

36. Office building; rape, sodomy, robbery; inadequate security, negligence in failure to change security procedures, failure to notify other building occupants of earlier robberies by intruders posing as messengers; settlement, $100,000. (Lowenberg v. Helmsley-Spear Inc., New York, New York Co. Supreme Ct. No. 23511/84, 7/86)

37. Nursing home; sexual assault on patient; negligent hiring, failure to do adequate background check on orderly's training and criminal record; judgment, $150,000. Fisher v. Beverly Enterprises, USDC, E.D. Arkansas, No. J-C-83-201, 8/86)

38. Apartment building; tenant rape, break-in; inadequate security, negligent hiring, failure to provide adequate locks for sliding glass doors; settlement, $225,000. Chatfield v. A. G. Spanos Development Co., Georgia, Fulton Co. Superior Court, No. 933427, 8/86)

39. Shopping center; kidnapping, rape, sodomy; inadequate lighting, prior crimes in or near the shopping center; settlement, $500,000. (M. L. v. Tri-City Shopping Center, California, San Diego Co. Superior Court, No. N27302, 3/86)

40. University parking lot; abduction, rape, robbery; negligence failure to undertake reasonable security measures in the parking lot, such as adequate lighting, limited access by fencing, and security patrols); settlement, $150,000. (Gray v. Howard University, USDC, DDC, No. 83-2927, 6/86)

41. Apartment complex; assault, rape; inadequate security measures (building in high-crime area and violated Uniform Building Code and Uniform Building Security Code prohibiting double-cylinder deadbolt locks and requiring burglar-resistant glass); settlement, 100,000. (Merado v. Mabry Management Co. Inc., California, Los Angeles Co. Superior Ct., No. C 562 954. 9/86)

42. Shopping mall; tenant assault, nose bitten off; failure to provide adequately designed security stations and adequate training, supervision, and equipment for guards; judgment, $865,000. Filosa v. Oliver T. Carr Co., USDC, DDC, No. 85-2910, 9/86)

43. Apartment; rape; failure to provide adequate security, ineffective push-button lock on door; settlement, $150,000. (Golub v. Spatig, Florida, Indian River Co. Circuit Ct., No. 86-138-CA-11, 10/86)

44. Apartment building; burglary, rape, sodomy; failure to provide adequate security, misrepresentation, failure to control passkeys or to change locks after becoming aware of passkey burglaries; judgment, $941,000 ($385,300 actual damages and $500,000 exemplary damages and prejudgment interest.) (Nichols v. Manivest Corp., Texas, Harris County 151 st Judicial District Ct., No. 85-34440, 11/86)

45. Apartment in condominium complex; tenant rape; negligence, failure to take reasonable steps to secure common areas of leased premises, prior criminal activities including other rapes, defective lock on sliding glass door, failure to provide a safe residence; no judgment or settlement available. (Lay v. Dworman, Oklahoma, 732 P.2d 455,1986)

46. Apartment; tenant rape; inadequate security, failure to warn tenants of passkey burglaries and the absence of security guards after 11 pm, failure to control passkeys, negligent hiring; settlement, $835,000. (Davis v. Manivest Corp., Texas, Harris County 1 51 st Judicial District Ct., No. 85-34441, 1/87)

47. Apartment complex; tenant rape; inadequate security, failure to warn, negligent failure to repair lock and secure apartment; settlement, $115,000. (Tulloch v. Tempo Management inc., Georgia, Fulton Co. Superior Ct. No. D-27445, 1/87)

48. Apartment building; tenant rape; inadequate security; judgment, $1.2 million. (Penner v. 601 Coeur D'Alene, Ltd., California, Los Angeles Co. Superior Ct., No. WEC 69744, 2/87)

49. Apartment complex; abdominal gunshot wound; negligent hiring, failure to supervise (allowing 13-year-old to play with-a .44 caliber Marlin rifle); settlement, $601,300. (Giaquinto v. Katz, USDC, C.D. California, No. CV 850163, 2/87)

50. Apartment complex; rape, sodomy, robbery; inadequate security; settlement, $1.15 million from four case settlements. (Moore v. Rochdale Village, New York, Nassau County Supreme Ct., No.7933-1986, 3/87)

51. High school grounds; rape of student; failure to provide proper protective supervision and trained security personnel, failure to warn students of similar attacks and trim or remove bushes offering concealment; no judgment or settlement available. (Fazzolari v. Portland School District No. 1J, Oregon, 303 1, 734 P.2d 1326, 1987)

52. Hospital parking lot; kidnapping, rape, murder; inadequate security, poor lighting in parking lot and parking ramp, prior wide-ranging criminal activity, liability based on "totality of circumstances"; no judgment or settlement available. (Small v. McKennan Hospital, 403 N.W.2d 410,1987)

53. Shopping mall parking lot; kidnapping, rape, robbery, herpes; inadequate security, failure to warn, understaffed; judgment, $400,000. (Doe v. Tampa Northwest, Ltd., Florida, Hillsborough County Circuit Ct., No. 84-17538, 3/87)

54. Hospital; kidnapping, assault, gunshot wounds, murder; inadequate security; judgment, $420,000. (Hicks v. Shelby County Health Care Corp., Tennessee, Shelby Co. Circuit Ct., No. 13644, 3/87)

55. Apartment building; rape, sodomy; inoperable security systems, defective door locks; settlement, $475,000. (Puerta v. 423-443 Tenants Corp., New York, Kings Co. Supreme Ct., No. 6791/86, 6/87)

56. Shopping mall; assault, rape, disfigurement; inadequate security judgment, $530.000. (Jardel Co., Inc. v. Hughes, Delaware, 523 A.2d 518,1987)

57. Apartment building; assault, false imprisonment; negligent hiring, failure to obtain firearm commission; settlement, $300,000. (Niakeen v. Hettig & Co., Texas, Harris County District Ct.. No. 86-02294, 7/87)

58. Apartment complex; assault-,gross negligence in failure to adequately light the property; settlement, $75..000. (Roberts v. Clark Financial Corp., Texas, Tarrant County 17th Judicial District Ct, No. 17-10042186, 10/87)

59. Apartment building; assault, rape; inadequate security measures; judgment, $104,000 plus interest and expert fees. (Durino v. Kamwood Co., California, Santa Monica Superior Ct., No. WEC 72639, 8/87)

60. Taco Bell restaurant; robbery, shooting; inadequate security measures, prior crimes, high-crime area; judgment, 40,000. (Taco Bell Inc. v. Lannon, Colorado, 744 P.2d 43,1987)

61. Apartment building; rape; failure to install secure locks, permitting easy access to the vacant apartment; settlement, $765,905 plus reimbursement for psychologist's fees. (Whiteside v. Vanderveer Association, New York, Kings Co. Supreme Ct., No. 8272/1985, 10/87)

62. Fast-food restaurant; shooting, quadriplegia; inadequate security, prior criminal acts on the premises; structured settlement with a present value below six figures. Nelson v. Church's Fried Chicken Inc., Kansas, Wyandotte Co. District Court No. 84-C-706, 8/87)

63. Apartment; rape, assault; inadequate security, misrepresentation about neighborhood, willfully indifferent to tenants' safety, inadequately trained guard, failure to repair outside lights; settlement, $675,000 plus annuity for son-projected lifetime yield $783,000. (Rehfeld v. III Properties, Minnesota, Ramsey Co. District Ct., No. 47639, 11/87)

64. Casino bar; wrongful death; failure to prevent foreseeable criminal act; judgment, $140,000. Broyles v. Elko Enterprises, Nevada, Elko Co. District Ct. No. 19918, 10/87)

65. Apartment; assault, wrongful death; inadequate security, guards instructed not to intervene in domestic violence; settlement, $1 million. (Lewis v. American Residential Management inc., Texas, Harris County 333d Judicial District Ct. No. 86-22688, 12/87)

66. Casino; assault, back injuries; negligent hiring, unprovoked attack by bouncer; judgment, $1 00,000 plus punitive damages. Vallee v. Lady Luck, Nevada, Clark Co. District Court No. A227260, 1/88)

67. Bank; college student shot in face, attempted robbery; inadequate security, failure to protect customers from foreseeable criminal acts by third parties; judgment, $1 million. (Verran v. Barnett Bank of Pinellas County, Florida, Pinellas Co. Circuit Ct., No. 86-17971-15, 2/88)

68. Apartment complex; burglaries, sexual assault; inadequate security, failure to notify tenants about previous violent crimes and burglaries on premises, failure to increase security after being notified of attacks; settlement, $250,000. (Middaugh v. Fogelman Management Corp., Texas, Harris County 189th Judicial District Ct., No. 86-29983, 1/ 88)

69. Apartment complex; sexual assault, theft; inadequate security, failure to warn tenants there were no guards during evening hours and that rapes had occurred; settlement, $669,000 (guaranteed payments of $1.5 million-$400,000 in cash and $1,000 per month for life, plus periodic lump sum payments totaling $850,000. (Givens v. Property Company of America, Texas, Bexar County 224th Judicial District Court No. 87C1-04177, 2/88)

70. Bus company terminal; wrongful death; inadequate security, failure to provide uniformed security for terminal located in run-down section of city, negligence; judgment, $550,000 with prejudgment interest for seven years, award estimated to reach 950,000. (Sharpe v. Peter Pan Bus Lines Inc., Massachusetts, 519 N.E.2d 1341, 1988)

71. YMCA; assault; inadequate security-locks did not provide sufficient protection and the communal bathroom was readily accessible; settlement, $1 24,000. (Cario v. YMCA of Greater New York, New York Co. Supreme Ct., No. 14986/84, 2/88)

72. Truck; rape and shooting in head of hitchhiker by driver; negligent entrustment, hiring, supervision and retention, and ratification of wrongful act; settlement, S300,000 includes 8,000 cash, $1,000 a month beginning at age 21 and guaranteed for 30 years, and Si 98..230 paid over the next 35 years. (Lafon v. Travis & Son, California, Contra Costa County Superior Ct. No. 280132, 1/88)

73. Rented house: rape: inadequate security and failure to warn of prior rape; settlement, 225,000. (Meyrose v. B & R investment #12, California, Monterey County Superior Court, No. 84204, 3/88)

74. Apartment complex; burglary, sexual assault; inadequate security, failure to warn tenants of previous crimes and burglaries on premises and increase security after being notified of the attacks; settlement, $350,000 plus monthly payments of $1,700 guaranteed for 20 years and lump sum payments totaling $580,000. Present value of the settlement is $700,000. (Kavanaugh v. Fogelman Management Corp., Texas, Harris County 234th Judicial District Ct. No. 87-36214, 1/88)

75. Apartment building; shooting, paraplegia, incontinence; failure to maintain sate premises, lack of secure doors and alarm system; judgment, 4.6 million. (Tarter v. Schildraut, New York, New York Co. Supreme Court No. 15161/85, 5/88)

76. Shopping center; homosexual rape in mall restroom; inadequate security, foreseeability of third-party criminal attack; no judgment or settlement available. (Galloway v. Bankers Trust Co., Iowa, 420 N.W.2d 437,1988)

77. Residence; sexual assault by door-to-door salesman; negligent hiring and retaining of employee known as unfit (assailant had criminal record and had previously sexually assaulted two saleswomen); settlement, $733,000 including cash payment of $125,000, seven annual payments totaling $175,000, a 30-year annuity paid annually totaling $1.16 million, and attorney fees totaling $322,000 paid over five years. (J. S. v. P. F. Collier inc., USDC, D. Dan., No.86-1778, 5/88)

78. Disco; malicious conduct intentional battery (bouncers threw patron out of disco and patron suffered fractured skull; settlement, $100,000. (Aviles v. Red Parrot Cabaret Inc., New York, New York Co. Supreme Ct., No. 22588/86, 4/88)

79. School restroom; assault; negligent in failing to protect student, knowing restroom was unsafe; no judgment or settlement available. (Leger v. Stockton Unified School District, 249 California Reporter 688, Ct. App., 1988)

80. Apartment parking lot; shooting of two tenants by unknown assailant; inadequate security, failure to install a garage door in front of the entrance to the building's outdoor parking lot despite prior criminal activity; settlement, $150,000. (Swibel v. Hoffman, New York, New York Co. Supreme Ct., No. 05481/83, 6/88)

81. Office building; rape, assault; inadequate security, the only building entrance was defective (lock broken, hinges loose, wood warped and splintered); judgment, 769,000. With interest, total recovery is $862,500. Friday v. Diversified Funding Inc., Massachusetts, Suffolk Co. Superior Ct., No. 87-3883, 6/88)

82. Vacant lot adjacent to 7-Eleven store; assaults; inadequate security, limited parking forced customers to park in adjacent vacant lot, history of store and surrounding area as hangout for juveniles; no judgment or settlement available. (Southland Corporation v. Superior Court, 250 California Reporter 57, Ct. App., 1 988)
COPYRIGHT 1991 American Society for Industrial Security
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1991 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:includes related article; suits against commercial entities for failure to provide security from criminal attacks
Author:Meadows, Robert J.
Publication:Security Management
Date:Jul 1, 1991
Previous Article:A smart investment.
Next Article:Your rights to references.

Related Articles
Liability lessons: security on trial.
Guarding against liability.
Protecting yourself against legal liability for in-house crime.
Fighting new defenses in inadequate security cases.
Anticipating D&O claims: a rise in environmental securities actions against companies is spurring an influx of pollution claims by policyholders.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2017 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters