Miami Negligent Security Lawyer

People should be able to enter an apartment complex, hotel, shopping center, parking garage, nightclub, or other property without being exposed to unreasonable and foreseeable dangers. When property owners and operators know that criminal activity presents a safety risk but fail to take reasonable precautions, the consequences can be devastating.

Negligent security cases arise when inadequate security measures contribute to an assault, robbery, shooting, sexual assault, or other criminal attack. These cases are different from most premises liability claims because the immediate cause of the injury is the intentional criminal act of another person. The legal question is whether the owner, operator, or other responsible party also bears responsibility for failing to provide reasonable security under the circumstances.

Sotolongo Law represents victims of serious injuries throughout Miami and South Florida. Miami negligent security lawyer Pedro P. Sotolongo has more than 20 years of personal injury legal experience and has handled cases involving major defendants and insurance companies. The firm combines serious litigation experience with the personal attention of a boutique practice.

Negligent Security Claims in Florida

A property owner is not automatically responsible whenever a crime occurs on its premises. Negligent security claims require evidence establishing that the defendant owed the injured person a duty of reasonable care, breached that duty, and that the security failure was legally connected to the injuries.

Foreseeability can be a major issue in these cases. An attack may be more foreseeable when a property has experienced previous violent crimes, robberies, assaults, break-ins, threats, or other incidents suggesting a security problem. The character of the property, its location, its operating practices, and other circumstances may also become relevant depending on the case.

The investigation therefore extends far beyond the particular crime that injured the client. A negligent security lawyer may need to reconstruct the property’s security history and determine what the people responsible for the premises knew before the attack occurred.

Properties Where Negligent Security Claims Most Often Arise

Security responsibilities vary depending upon the property and the risks reasonably associated with it. Negligent security cases can arise at, for example:

• Apartment and condominium complexes
• Hotels and resorts
• Shopping centers and retail stores
• Parking lots and parking garages
• Bars and nightclubs
• Restaurants
• Gas stations and convenience stores
• Office buildings
• Entertainment venues
• Banks and ATMs
• College or university housing
• Commercial properties

Miami’s combination of dense residential development, tourism, nightlife, hotels, high-rise buildings, and heavily used parking facilities creates many situations in which owners and operators must consider how people safely enter, leave, and move through their properties.

Common Security Failures That Can Put People at Risk

There is no single security measure that every property must provide. Reasonable precautions depend on the circumstances.

A negligent security investigation may examine issues such as broken entrance gates, doors that do not lock, defective access-control systems, inadequate lighting, malfunctioning surveillance cameras, missing or insufficient security personnel, failure to respond to prior incidents, and inadequate procedures for controlling access to restricted areas.

At an apartment complex, a broken pedestrian gate could allow unauthorized people onto the property. At a hotel, inadequate control over entrances or guest areas may create different concerns. At a nightclub, the investigation may focus on security staffing, crowd control, previous violence, and how employees responded to escalating confrontations.

Sometimes a property appears to have substantial security measures, but those measures are ineffective in practice. Cameras may not work. Gates may remain open. Security officers may be inadequately trained. Management may repeatedly receive complaints but fail to correct the problem.

The issue is not simply whether the property had “security.” The investigation considers whether the precautions were reasonable under the circumstances and whether failures contributed to the attack.

Prior Crime and Foreseeability

Evidence of prior criminal activity can become important in negligent security litigation. Police records, calls for service, incident reports, complaints from residents or customers, internal security reports, prior lawsuits, and communications with property management may help establish what had been happening at or around the premises.

The details matter. A prior incident does not necessarily establish that a later attack was foreseeable, and defendants may dispute whether earlier crimes were sufficiently similar, frequent, recent, or close to the location where the plaintiff was injured.

Property owners and insurers may characterize earlier incidents as unrelated or insignificant. The plaintiff’s investigation may therefore require a broader examination of the property’s history rather than relying on a single prior crime.

This evidence can also reveal patterns. Repeated vehicle break-ins in a parking garage, assaults in a common area, unauthorized people entering an apartment property, or recurring disturbances at a nightclub may show that management had reason to evaluate and improve its security practices.

Florida Law and Third-Party Criminal Acts

Florida law specifically addresses premises liability cases involving criminal acts committed by third parties.

Florida Statute § 768.0701 provides that when a person lawfully on commercial or real property is injured by the criminal act of a third party and brings an action against the property’s owner, lessor, operator, or manager, the factfinder must consider the fault of all persons who contributed to the injury.

That means the criminal actor’s conduct can be part of the allocation of fault even when that person is not the premises defendant.

This issue can have substantial consequences in negligent security litigation. Property owners and their insurers may emphasize that the person who committed the assault, robbery, or shooting was responsible for the attack. The plaintiff’s case must establish a separate basis for holding the premises defendant responsible for his own alleged negligence.

Special Rules for Multifamily Residential Properties

Florida law also contains specific provisions addressing security at certain multifamily residential properties.

Florida Statute § 768.0706 defines covered multifamily residential property to include certain apartment, townhouse, and condominium properties consisting of at least five dwelling units on a parcel. An owner or principal operator that substantially implements the statute’s specified security measures can obtain a presumption against liability for certain criminal acts committed by third parties.

The statutory measures include requirements involving security cameras at points of entry and exit, parking lot lighting, lighting in walkways and common areas, locks on dwelling unit doors and windows, and other security measures. The statute also addresses crime prevention assessments and employee training.

These provisions make a detailed examination of the property particularly important. A negligent security claim involving an apartment or other covered residential property may require determining which statutory measures were actually implemented and whether the defendant qualifies for the statutory presumption.

Convenience businesses are also subject to separate Florida laws concerning security measures, and substantial implementation of applicable requirements can provide a presumption against liability in connection with certain third-party crimes.

Evidence in a Miami Negligent Security Case

Negligent security cases can require an unusually broad investigation.

Surveillance footage may show the assailant entering the property, the attack itself, security personnel’s response, or problems with access control. Access logs and key-card records may show how someone entered a building. Maintenance records can establish whether a gate, lock, light, or camera had been broken and for how long.

Other potentially important evidence can include:

• Police reports and calls for service
• Prior incident reports
• Resident or customer complaints
• Security logs
• Surveillance recordings
• Access-control records
• Security staffing schedules
• Security company contracts
• Employee training materials
• Lighting inspections
• Maintenance and repair records
• Emails and communications involving security concerns
• Photographs of entrances, gates, fences, doors, and common areas
• Records concerning previous criminal activity

Experts may also be used in appropriate cases to evaluate security practices, lighting, access control, crime-prevention measures, or other technical issues.

Much of this evidence may be controlled by the potential defendant. Beginning the investigation promptly can be critical to preserving it.

Serious and Catastrophic Injuries From Negligent Security Assaults

Negligent security cases can involve some of the most severe injuries in premises liability litigation. Victims may suffer gunshot wounds, stab wounds, traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord damage, fractures, internal organ injuries, nerve damage, permanent scarring, or other catastrophic trauma. Some attacks result in permanent disability or death.

The psychological consequences of violent crime can also be profound. Depending on the facts and applicable law, the damages analysis may involve both the physical and emotional consequences of the attack.

Proving those damages requires a careful understanding of medical evidence, which remains a chief focus at Sotolongo Law. Attorney Pedro P. Sotolongo spent five years defending medical malpractice cases before representing injured plaintiffs. That experience taught him not only the law surrounding complex injuries but also how to analyze medical records, communicate with physicians, and work with medical experts.

Every lawyer knows the law, but not every lawyer understands the medicine. When an attack causes catastrophic injuries requiring multiple surgeries, rehabilitation, or lifelong care, understanding both can be essential to presenting the full extent of the client’s losses.

Defense Strategies in Negligent Security Cases

One of the most common defenses is that the criminal attack was unforeseeable. The property owner may argue that nothing in the property’s history gave it reason to anticipate the crime.

The defense may also argue that its existing security precautions were reasonable. It may point to cameras, guards, lighting, gates, locks, policies, or other measures as evidence that it acted appropriately.

Another strategy is to focus responsibility on the criminal perpetrator. Florida law expressly requires consideration of the fault of all people who contributed to the injury in covered premises cases involving third-party crimes.

Defendants may also challenge causation. Even if some security measure was inadequate, they may contend that additional lighting, another camera, a functioning gate, or a security officer would not have prevented the attack.

Finally, insurers frequently dispute damages, particularly when a victim requires extensive future medical care or claims permanent impairment.

An effective negligent security case must be prepared to address each of these issues with evidence rather than assumptions.

Negligent Security Cases Require a Different Kind of Investigation

These claims often involve two parallel investigations. The criminal investigation focuses on identifying and prosecuting the person responsible for the attack. In contrast, a civil negligent security investigation asks different questions: What did the property owner know? What had happened there before? What security measures were in place? Which measures were not functioning? Were previous complaints ignored? Could reasonable precautions have reduced the risk?

The fact that police arrest a perpetrator does not answer those questions. Likewise, the absence of an arrest does not necessarily determine whether a civil negligent security claim exists. The criminal case and premises liability case involve different legal issues, evidence, and burdens of proof.

Sotolongo Law investigates the conduct of the property owner and other potentially responsible entities while developing the medical evidence necessary to show the consequences of the attack.

Because We Care® reflects the firm’s commitment to treating clients as people rather than case numbers.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is a property owner liable for assaults that occur on its premises?

Not necessarily. Property owners are not insurers against every criminal act committed on their premises. Negligent security cases focus on whether the defendant had a legal duty under the circumstances, whether reasonable security precautions were taken, and whether a security failure contributed to the plaintiff’s injuries.

Do there have to be previous crimes on the property to create a legal duty?

The foreseeability analysis can be fact-specific. Prior incidents at the property can be important evidence, but negligent security cases should be evaluated based on the complete circumstances rather than assuming that one particular type or location of prior crime is always required. A building in a high-crime area could require additional security as a reasonable measure, even if the property itself has not seen criminal activity.

Can an apartment complex be liable if its security gate was broken?

Potentially. Important questions include how long the gate had been broken, whether management knew about the problem, whether residents had complained, what other security measures existed, how the attacker entered the property, and whether the defective gate was causally related to the crime. Florida’s statutory provisions concerning security measures at certain multifamily residential properties may also be relevant.

Can I bring a negligent security claim if the person who attacked me was never caught?

Potentially. A civil premises liability case focuses on the conduct of the property owner or other responsible defendant. Although identifying the attacker can provide important evidence, the absence of an arrest does not automatically determine whether the property owner negligently failed to provide reasonable security.

How do you prove liability after an assault or shooting on someone else’s property?

Potentially important evidence includes surveillance recordings, photographs, police reports, witness information, access records, security logs, maintenance records, prior complaints, incident reports, and records showing the condition of gates, locks, lights, cameras, or other security equipment. Because some records and video can be lost or overwritten, prompt investigation can be particularly important.

Contact a Miami Negligent Security Lawyer

If you or someone in your family suffered serious injuries in an assault, robbery, shooting, or other violent incident at an apartment complex, hotel, parking facility, business, or other property in Miami, the criminal act may not be the only issue that deserves investigation.

Sotolongo Law can examine the property’s security history, seek evidence of prior incidents, investigate access controls and security measures, identify potentially responsible parties, and develop the medical evidence needed to demonstrate the consequences of the attack.

Pedro P. Sotolongo brings more than 20 years of personal injury legal experience and a valuable background in medical litigation to these cases. The firm provides the individual attention of a caring, boutique practice while preparing to take on property owners, management companies, security contractors, insurers, and other substantial defendants.

Sotolongo Law also caters to Spanish-speaking clients and families, including members of Miami’s Cuban, Venezuelan, Nicaraguan, Argentinian, and broader Latin American and Hispanic communities.

Contact Sotolongo Law today for a free consultation.

The firm charges no attorney’s fee unless it secures a recovery for you. Because We Care®.