Nearly $1.2 Million Verdict For Man Beat & Shot at Popular Restaurant

Haggard Law Firm > Negligent Security  > Nearly $1.2 Million Verdict For Man Beat & Shot at Popular Restaurant

Nearly $1.2 Million Verdict For Man Beat & Shot at Popular Restaurant

(Pictured Above from Left to Right, Following Thursday’s Verdict: Haggard Law’s Todd Michaels, Champion Legal’s Dan Karanikis, Client Nick Pastor, co-counsel Robert Solomon of Saban and Solomon, Haggard Law’s James Blecke)

Broward County Jury Blames Longtime Las Olas Hotspot for Shooting and Beating of Patron, Orders Business to Pay Victim Nearly $1.2 Million


Ft. Lauderdale, FL – Following a 9 day trial, a Broward County jury agreed that management of longtime Las Olas hotspot Mangos could have prevented the beating and shooting of a man if it had adequate security measures in place. The victim (plaintiff) Nicolas Pastor, was awarded $1.182 Million for the injuries he says altered the course of his life.

The incident occurred March 24, 2012.  Pastor was alongside a couple of friends waiting for a table at Mangos in Ft. Lauderdale. The manager of Mangos told the police that night that Pastor was aggressively grabbed by a man inside the restaurant who began viciously beating him along with two other men.

March 24th, 2012 – The scene outside of Mangos Restaurant and Lounge following the beating and shooting of Nick Pastor.

“Mangos had no security and no security procedures to deal with this fight.  According to their manager, their only concern was pushing their customer who had been attacked out into the street with his attackers,”  says Todd Michaels of The Haggard Law Firm.

Michaels tried and built the case with co-counsel Robert Solomon of Saban and Solomon.

Once the fight was in the street, one of the assailants pulled out a pistol and shot Pastor. The then 32-year-old man was rushed to Broward General Hospital where doctors completed emergency lifesaving procedures including an exploratory laparotomy and a thoracotomy. During the trial, Michaels and Solomon made clear that six years later the attack on their client shattered his life-limiting his ability to work, to sleeping, and restricting his ability to play with his son.

“Mangos was big enough that it employed 17 servers, 10 kitchen staff, 5 bartenders, 1 bar back, 2 hosts, and 1 or 2 managers, but no bouncers, security guards, or other security personnel despite the nature of the business as a restaurant, bar, lounge, late night destination and a history of crime at the premises” said Solomon. The trial lawyers called several witnesses who testified that the restaurant had consistent issues with altercations and arguments during the evenings.


Michaels added, “we are happy for our client and hope this verdict helps he and his family mend the broken pieces of his life while sending a message to other bars, restaurants, and nightclubs that security is a priority, not a luxury.”


This verdict was a resounding statement of liability directed at the restaurant. “Despite the fact there were three attackers, and that many witnesses stated that once outside Pastor acted aggressively, the jury placed 100% of the liability of the incident on Mangos.  The simple fact is, they should never have put Nick in that position.  When you push your beaten, bloody customer out in the street with his attackers, anything can happen.” says Michaels. “As we often see in the majority of negligent security cases our Firm tries, this was is a tragedy that could and should have been avoided if basic, logical and obvious security measures had been taken by the business” asserts Michaels.

CONTACT Todd Michaels:



1 Comment

  • Jury # 4
    Reply December 7, 2018 at 7:35 am

    The jury basically agreed on 100 % liability on the defense, but divided on the amounts to be awarded. Two juries suggested an award in the 300k range (past and future damages) while another two were suggesting 1 M, the other two juries were flexible to agree. But since deliberations began at 5:30 pm, the jury was tired and wanting to go home. so they deliberated quite quickly. But let me point out…. Had the jury more time to deliberate, the amount would have gone up about a 30% or more.

Leave a Comment