Lakeland Negligent Security Lawyer

If you were assaulted or sustained severe injuries on someone else’s property or, in some circumstances, your own home, you could seek compensation through a personal injury claim. The negligent security lawyers at Dismuke Law can help you seek financial compensation from the assailant and the property owner who failed to take reasonable steps to protect you. 

In Florida, you have a right to seek compensation if a property owner fails to provide adequate security measures when they knew or should have known there was a risk zone. If you suffered an injury due to the criminal act of another, contact a personal injury lawyer at Dismuke Law for a free consultation. Our compassionate negligent security attorneys in Lakeland can analyze your case and determine whether you have grounds to pursue legal action.

Negligent Security Lawyer’s Analysis of a Case – Duty

The Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court of Appeal summed up Florida law regarding the duty owed by a property owner or business owner in a negligent security case to an invitee in Banosmoreno v. Walgreen Co., 299 Fed. Appx 912 (11th Cir. 2011). Under Florida law, a business owes invitees a duty to use due care to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition. This includes the duty to protect customers from criminal attacks that are reasonably foreseeable. An invitee is typically considered to be one who enters upon the premises of another for purposes connected with the business of the owner or occupant of the premises.

There are countless examples of incidents where people are injured or killed by an assailant on private property. The question for a negligent security lawyer becomes: did the property owner or business owner fail to provide adequate security when it knew or should have known about a foreseeable risk to invitees?

A duty may also arise by other means as pointed out in Vic Potamkin Chevrolet v. Horne, 505 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), the duty to protect strangers against the bad conduct of another can only arise if, at the time of the injury, the defendant is in actual or constructive (effectively) control of one of the following:

• the instrumentality;
• the premises upon which the tort is committed; or
• the tortfeasor (the person who commits the violent act).

A skilled negligent security lawyer can help you understand your legal rights following an injury due to failed security on someone else’s property. Speak with a personal injury attorney at Dismuke Law to determine whether you have grounds to sue the at-fault parties.

Negligent Security Lawyer’s Analysis of a Case – Foreseeability of the Risk

A critical element of a successful negligent security case is the injured party’s ability to establish that the defendant knew or should have known that a risk exists. A case regarding foreseeability was the Florida Supreme Court decision in Hall v. Billy Jack’s, Inc., 458 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 1986).

The Hall case involved a bar patron who was assaulted by another patron while watching a billiards game. Foreseeability can be established in the following ways:

• By proving that a proprietor had actual or constructive knowledge of a particular assailant’s inclination toward violence or by proving that the proprietor had actual or constructive knowledge of a dangerous condition on his premises that was likely to cause harm to a patron.
• A dangerous condition may be indicated if, according to past experience (i.e., the reputation of the tavern), there is a likelihood of disorderly conduct by third persons in general which might endanger the safety of patrons or if security staffing is inadequate.
• If the lounge management knew or should have known of a general or specific risk to [the victim] and failed to take reasonable steps to guard against that risk and if, because of that failure, Hall was injured, [the business owner] may be shown to have breached its duty and may be held financially responsible for [a victim’s] injuries.

Factors to Establish Foreseeability

The Courts have acknowledged foreseeability can be established by a general zone of risk in multiple ways. One Florida court noted that the factors to be considered when establishing foreseeability are:

• Industry standards of care in providing security measures;
• Community crime rate;
• The extent of assaults or criminal activity in the area or in similar business enterprises; and
• The presence of suspicious persons and the peculiar security problems posed by the design of the premises.

Focusing on the third factor, the extent of assaults or criminal activity in the area or in similar business enterprises, both proximity of time and geography of similar criminal activity can establish foreseeability.

One method often used is collecting data on reported crimes in a given area around the location of the incident and presenting it through a crime plot. Below is an example showing crimes in New York City in 2019:

In establishing criteria, a negligent security lawyer can present evidence of similar criminal conduct in close geographic proximity along with close temporal proximity, meaning how close together the crimes occurred. Ideally, a negligent security lawyer in Lakeland, Florida can establish that crimes were committed on the same property within a couple of years before the plaintiff’s incident.

Security Failures in Residential Complexes

Many negligent security cases arise from a lack of security in apartment complexes. There are far too many slumlords collecting money from tenants and the government to maintain apartment complexes that are havens for violent crimes. These slumlords do not care about their tenants’ or invitees’ safety.

If you have been seriously injured in your apartment complex or at another complex where you were invited to enter, a landlord may be held liable for failing to implement security measures that would deter such crime. Speak with a negligent security attorney in Lakeland, Florida to find out if you can file a personal injury claim against the landlord. 

Security Failures in Private Residential Homes

In addition to commercial and multifamily properties, negligent security cases can arise if you were injured in your own home when a private security company or another third party charged with providing security failed to do their job.

The Third District Court of Appeal dealt with this type of case in 50 State Sec. Serv. V. Giandrandi. The claimant, the Estate of Lidia Giandrandi, brought suit after Lidia Giandrandi was murdered in her own home in a gated community. The Estate’s attorneys were able to establish that at least one security guard was to be patrolling the community in a vehicle continuously.

To ensure the guard was moving, checkpoints were located throughout the community. There were approximately two hours in the early morning when the security failed to check in to any of the checkpoints. During that time, time Ms. Giandrandi was murdered. Since the guard was negligent in their duty to ensure a reasonably safe environment, the security firm and property owner were held liable for Ms. Giandrandi’s injuries and wrongful death.