Negligent & Inadequate Security

Leesfield & Partners has been on the national leading edge of inadequate security cases and the development of trial techniques in premises security litigation. The area of inadequate security includes recovery for injuries caused by criminal assaults, rapes, robberies and attacks due to inadequate premises security, as well as other inadequate conditions in commercial and residential premises.

In most negligent security cases, the plaintiff who has been injured due to a criminal act brings an action against the owner, manager and/or occupier of the premises. These are the entities that are in a position to control or prevent the incident where the plaintiff was injured from taking place.

The general common law principle is that there is no duty to protect against harm caused by the criminal act of a third party. The exception is that a duty is imposed to take reasonable measures where such criminal acts are foreseeable.

Negligent security cases generally involve an injury to an individual as a result of a criminal assault or robbery at a commercial premises. These frequently occur at malls, shopping centers, hotels, motels, office buildings, schools or parking garages. The majority of cases arise from strong arm robberies and sexual assaults. A strong arm robbery is a robbery by force or threat of force (it does not require a weapon). An armed robbery involves the use of a weapon. A "purse snatch" may be a strong armed robbery (if force or the threat of force is used), an armed robbery (if threatened with a weapon), or a larceny (when a purse is taken without threat or any contact). It is often a matter of semantics whether a purse snatch is a larceny or a robbery.

The firm has won numerous verdicts and settlements in cases arising from crime at malls, hotels, gas stations, convenience stores schools, shopping centers, apartments and businesses. The firm has obtained successful multimillion dollar recoveries throughout Florida, and in the rest of the country. For a complete list of the firm's representative results, go to our Verdicts and Settlements section.

The firm has distinguished itself in efficiently and aggressively represent its clients until a successful resolution is reached either through trial or through an out-of-court settlement. To contact one of our experienced trial lawyers call our Miami law office today at 800-836-6400 or click here for a free and full case evaluation.

For almost 40 years, Leesfield & Partners has strongly and efficiently represented victims of crimes in inadequate security cases. Our firm represented plaintiff in the landmark case Jeffery v. Publix. Tim Jeffery was working on a sprinkler system at a strip shopping center. He heard an 89 year old woman scream and looked over to see a man grabbing her purse. Tim chased the robber, which jumped into a waiting vehicle. Tim chased the vehicle down and pounded on the tinted window and demanded the return of the purse. The robber fired a shot through the window, striking Tim in the chest. Tim made an excellent recovery but was left with scarring and some vascular damage to his arm. Suit filed based on the rescue doctrine for failure to have adequate security. Case settled for $125,000 against the landlord. Verdict of $1,510,000 against supermarket.

In another inadequate security case, a student at a university was killed in his on campus apartment by the former boyfriend of a girl he was seeing. This firm brought suit against the school for failing to have adequate security. The case settled prior to suit for $1,500,000. Our attorneys handled a case against another university where a foreign visitor attending school in South Florida sustained paraplegic injuries resulting from being shot in the dormitory building as three men attempted to steal his car. The firm obtained a $3,200,000 settlement on his behalf.

When a store clerk at an outlet mall was sexually assaulted in the store in the middle of the day, our firm argued that the absence of security at the mall contributed to the crime. Our firm obtained a $1,136,000 award in this case. More recently, a 24 year old youth counselor who was robbed and shot at a bank ATM was rendered a paraplegic. The defendant had considered a drive through ATM for several years but had decided against it. The perpetrator was high on drugs and alcohol and claimed security would not have deterred him from committing the crime, and claimed plaintiff resisted the robbery. This case was successfully settled for $3,000,000. For a complete list of the firm's representative results, go to our Verdicts and Settlements section.