Negligent security successes
Trial Successes
“Jane Doe” v. ABM [Supreme New York] Defense Verdict Plaintiff worked in a back-office bank facility, for which our client provided security personnel. Although plaintiff alleged that she had notified the security officers that she had obtained an Order of Protection against her former husband, the ex-husband nonetheless gained entrance to the building, convinced plaintiff to leave with him, and then repeatedly slashed her about the face when they got to the street. We convinced the jury that the alleged negligent security within the building was not a proximate cause of the assault that took place outside after plaintiff made the intervening and unfortunate decision to leave the building with her assailant.
Summary Judgment & Dispositive Motions
Villa v. Paradise Theater Productions [Supreme New York] Plaintiff was attending a rap concert at our client’s theater. After being invited into a “VIP” section of the theater, he got into an argument with a rap artist and was slashed in the face with a box-cutter by an unknown assailant who was part of that artist’s entourage. The court agreed with the position we expressed in our summary judgment motion that the security provided at the concert by our client was reasonable, and that the assault by the unknown third-party was unforeseeable. The court also agreed with our argument that the plaintiff’s expert had not established a higher standard of care for such an event, and that the theater owner was not the guarantor of the plaintiff’s safety.
Allstate Insurance Co., a/s/o Usher v. 1245 Realty, et al. [Supreme Nassau] Plaintiff alleged that inadequate security permitted unidentified third-party trespassers to enter the premises and ignite a fire (found by the FDNY to be arson) in an elevator shaft of our client’s residential building. Plaintiff also alleged that the building owner was negligent because the smoke detectors in the building had malfunctioned, allowing the fire in the elevator shaft to spread and cause property damage in the subject apartment. The court agreed with our argument that plaintiff failed to establish sufficient evidence that the building owner was responsible for the criminal acts of unknown third parties, or that the allegedly malfunctioning smoke detectors caused the property damage complained of.
