The article below from The Florida Times Union details the latest on a mass shooting at the Eureka Garden Apartment Complex in Jacksonville. The media reports that 7 people were shot by at least three gunmen.
Shots fired and people getting shot at the Eureka Garden Apartments is on ongoing problem. The complex has had multiple homicides and violent crimes over the past few years, including the murder of 22-year-old Christopher Cornelio (pictured above with his parents). Haggard Law Firm attorneys Douglas McCarron and Jason Brenner currently represent Cornelio’s family, including his young son, in a civil suit against the property’s owners. Cornelio was shot and killed at Eureka Garden in March of 2014. The ownership and management of the complex refuse to take the necessary steps to make the property even remotely safe.
Their indifference was also seen in a massive Code Enforcement sweep last October. The living conditions at the complex were deplorable. Sadly, this incident appears to be a result of wealthy corporation placing profits over the safety its residents.
From Jacksonville Times Union Article: 7 wounded in Eureka Garden attack; about 50 rounds fired, police say
….People were sitting or standing around a stairway to Unit 11 at Eureka Garden late Sunday when the gunfire began.
Gunmen opened up at 11:45 p.m., hitting seven people outside a building at the troubled Westside apartment complex as other bullets shattered and pierced the windows of a parked sport-utility vehicle nearby, according to the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office.
Police said three gunmen walked up between the two apartment units across Altoona Court, just a few dozen feet off Plymouth Street at the west end of the subsidized apartment complex. They aimed at eight or 10 people “just hanging out” in front of Unit 11, leaving two in life-threatening condition, police said.
“They fired numerous rounds. It appears to be rifle rounds and from handguns, into the crowd,” said Sgt. Shawn Coursey, part of the Sheriff’s Violent Crime Impact team. “There was an infant in the crowd. Thankfully, the infant was not struck.”
The gunmen fired more than 50 rounds at the people before fleeing. Victims were taken to UF Health Jacksonville and Orange Park Medical Center, police said.
…to read entire article from Jacksonville Times Union, click here
The Haggard Law Firm’s Todd Michaels have been invited to speak at the 62nd Annual ASIS International Conference in Orlando next month. ASIS International is a global community of security practitioners, each of whom has a role in the protection of assets – people, property, and/or information. The upcoming conference is the organization’s largest event of the year.
Michaels will present a seminar titled How to Avoid a Million Dollar Verdict Against Your Business and another called Duty and Consequence.
ASIS members represent virtually every industry in the public and private sectors, and organizations of all sizes. From entry-level managers to CSOs to CEOs, from security veterans to consultants and those transitioning from law enforcement or the military, the ASIS community is global and diverse. More than 20,000 industry professionals are expected to attend the conference.
The Haggard Law Firm has litigated more than 155 negligent security cases since 2007, delivering more than $345 million in verdicts and settlements in those cases.
Preparing to exceed the burden of proof and maximizing damages begins at client signup. The defense counsel has a head start. From the moment of loss, the defendant has secured or destroyed evidence, interviewed witnesses, researched the client, developed theories of defense, comparative fault, and otherwise played five or six key chess moves before plaintiff counsel even knew they were in the game.
Assuming the defendant is tireless and meticulous in its work is the only safe and essential assumption plaintiff counsel should make when preparing a case. Regardless of the cause of action, assume that the plaintiff and every friendly known witness has a history that, if known, will adversely affect the ultimate outcome. Until proven otherwise through the use of public records and interviews, all of which should occur pre-suit outside of formal discovery, remain vigilant in learning everything to know about the client and witnesses that may be called on throughout the litigation. Background checks, civil, criminal and family court files all will either confirm a cautiously optimistic impression of the plaintiff, or prepare to deal with the collateral—usually irrelevant, but always distracting—attacks upon the person of your client when the time comes. The same exercise is performed upon all anticipated defendants.
This pregame ritual requires an attorney/client relationship that exceeds the formality of the client contract. As advocates, attorneys should remain focused on the end game, but along the way, the attorney-client relationship must be a candidly safe space. Building the trust necessary to avoid surprises down the line involves introducing other staff upon initiation of the attorney-client relationship. My assistant regularly phones witnesses and clients, even when no information is needed and when no deadlines are looming. This process signals to the client the reality that we are working hard for them, and increases the probability that we will learn in advance of any issues that may prove troublesome down the road.
Once in suit, the rules of discovery and formal deadlines begin to take hold of an attorney’s case building efforts, which makes the “informal” pre-suit information gathering process all the more important. As such, guard against rushing into suit. The time to mercilessly press for a special set trial begins after committing to the case armed with all reasonably available information and background materials on everyone involved.
Attorneys know in advance those materials that will be asked of the clients in standard discovery requests, but shouldn’t attorneys have learned as much as possible about the defendant and possible witnesses before filing suit? Filing suit is the moment in which we regain the tactical edge, because together with the complaint, targeted discovery requests based on information and materials we learned pre-suit ensure the defendant is responding to us rather than the other way around. And when the inevitable discovery is propounded upon the client, staff and attorney time is not wasted gathering materials and information that should have been in their possession from the beginning.
Whether an automobile accident, premises liability, medical negligence or product liability case, pre-suit research should inform attorneys of obstacles to success, and tools available to address those challenges as they arise. The internet is a tremendous resource, which should be used to identify the original source materials available for more detailed exploration. For example, in a premises liability case at a shopping mall, an attorney may not have pre-suit access to the leases between the various merchants and the management company or landowner. But if applicable to the facts of the case, the county record department will have any relevant easements pertaining to the property on file, often with supporting materials that one would not expect to find in a clerk’s office, including correspondence between landlords and tenants. In a dram shop case, the state licensing board for alcohol permits will have submissions from the applicant in order to have obtained the license to serve alcohol. The documents may include extensive correspondence by the soon-to-be defendant regarding the scale and scope of the intended use of that license, prior negative incidents, and attorneys may be surprised by the detailed photographs or schematic drawings of the establishment.
This pre-suit effort likely will not deliver a case on a silver platter. It may not ultimately provide the silver bullet at the first key deposition, where information obtained outside of discovery truly has the ability to surprise opposing counsel. But those attorneys who have dug as deeply as possible into all foreseeable issues and contingencies pre-suit will more efficiently prosecute the case and be ready to confidently select a jury the first time the case is up at calendar call. And, if an attorney by chance does find that silver bullet before the case is even filed, all the better.
Managing Partner Michael Haggard has been named to the 2016 Florida Trend Magazine Legal Elite list. Attorneys selected to the list are chosen for recognition by their peers.
Florida Trend invited all in-state members of the Florida Bar to participate. Lawyers were asked to name attorneys whom they hold in the highest regard or would recommend to others.
Haggard is also a member of the Legal Elite Hall of Fame which is comprised of a distinguished group of attorneys who have consistently earned high rankings from their peers in the annual Legal Elite voting.
Opa Locka, Florida – The owners of the Top Value Supermarket in Opa Locka have agreed to a payout of $1 million to the Estate of Miguel Pilotos, who was gunned down on the property during a robbery Aug. 21, 2013.
The 71-year-old man was simply picking up groceries when he was shot at the supermarket located on Northwest 137th street and northwest 27th avenue. The crime was caught on camera. The gunman rode up to the victim’s car on a bicycle and pulled out his weapon and shot the husband and father in the neck. Pilotos, who had under $20 on him when he was killed, had been with his wife Aleida for 25 years. He emigrated from Cuba 19 years ago.
The lawyer for the Pilotos family, Todd Michaels of The Haggard Law Firm, says the crime was predictable and preventable. “At the time of his murder, Miguel Pilotos was the third Top Value customer robbed and shot and the second one killed in that parking lot, in six months” says Michaels. He adds “despite the previous crimes, and the widespread knowledge the business was located in a high-crime area, the supermarket did not alter security in the parking lot in any way.”
The Haggard Law Firm’s William Haggard, Michael Haggard, Douglas McCarron, Christopher Marlowe, Todd Michaels and James Blecke have all been named to the 2016 Super Lawyers List.
Super Lawyers is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high-degree of peer recognition and professional achievement.
The patented selection process includes independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations.
An 8-year-old boy is in critical condition after nearly drowning in a pool on Royal Caribbean’s Anthem of the Seas cruise ship Thursday afternoon.
The Coast Guard said the boy had been in the water for 8 to 10 minutes before cruise officials found him, the Associated Press reports. Medical representatives performed CPR on him before a helicopter landed on the ship to take him to a hospital, company officials told Today.
“Our thoughts and prayers are with the family that has been changed by this tragedy. We hold public pools, community pools and private pools to high codes and industry standards across the United States. It is time for the cruise lines to be held to the same safety level” says The Haggard Law Firm’s Managing Partner Michael Haggard.
The Haggard Law Firm, has represented a number of families who’ve had to deal with significant injury or death of a loved one in drowning accidents. The Firm’s work representing victims of drownings has spurred changes in state codes and laws governing pool safety.
“The cruise lines are well aware that people come on their ships to let down their guard and take a break from everyday life. They are well aware of the dangers inherent in swimming pools and so many of their activities. The fact that basic pool safety is ignored is simply astonishing” says The Haggard Law Firm’s Todd Michaels.
The cruise industry earns nearly $40 billion* in revenue per year and it is only growing as cruise lines continue to build and sail new ships. The growth will lead to more tragedies if investments into pool safety measures and new standards are not made.
Michaels adds “cruise ships are floating cities with a thousand dangers lurking around every corner. How many people have to die or suffer serious injury before the cruise lines get serious about safety? ”
Haggard Law Conducts Negligent Security Seminar During the FJA Convention this Week
Todd Michaels lead a seminar yesterday during the 2016 Florida Justice Association’s Annual Convention in Palm Beach. Michaels discussed the ins and outs of trying a negligent security case in Florida.
The seminar was part of the FJA’s Young Lawyers Seminar Series. Michaels is currently an FJA board member, the Miami-Dade County Vanguard Chair and will begin a term on the organization’s Executive Committee next week.
Recently, Michaels delivered a $1 million settlement to the family of Miguel Pilotos in a negligent security case. The 71-year-old was gunned down in a supermarket parking lot in 2013. In the last 10 years, The Haggard Law Firm has handled over 150 negligent security cases and delivered over $340 million in verdicts and settlements in those cases.
NEGLIGENT SECURITY CASE RESULT: Family of 71-year-old man murdered in parking lot of Opa Locka supermarket to receive $1 million in settlement with the businesses’ owners
Victim’s wife of 25 years hopes result of lawsuit will drive other businesses to increase security measures
Opa Locka, Florida – The owners of the Top Value Supermarket in Opa Locka have agreed to a payout of $1 million to the Estate of Miguel Pilotos, who was gunned down on the property during a robbery Aug. 21, 2013.
The 71-year-old man was simply picking up groceries when he was shot at the supermarket located on Northwest 137th street and northwest 27th avenue. The crime was caught on camera. The gunman rode up to the victim’s car on a bicycle and pulled out his weapon and shot the husband and father in the neck. Pilotos, who had under $20 on him when he was killed, had been with his wife Aleida for 25 years. He emigrated from Cuba 19 years ago.
[mkd_blockquote text=”At the time of his murder, Miguel Pilotos was the third Top Value customer robbed and shot and the second one killed in that parking lot, in six months” title_tag=”” width=”” border_color=”#930027″]
The lawyer for the Pilotos family, Todd Michaels of The Haggard Law Firm, says the crime was predictable and preventable. “At the time of his murder, Miguel Pilotos was the third Top Value customer robbed and shot and the second one killed in that parking lot, in six months” says Michaels. He adds “despite the previous crimes, and the widespread knowledge the business was located in a high-crime area, the supermarket did not alter security in the parking lot in any way.”
Seventeen-year-old Jamal Jackson was arrested for the crime.
Coverage following the arrest of Jackson several weeks after the crime:
When you argue that your client’s injuries could have been prevented through the use of reasonable security measures, the defendant will claim those measures are excessive or unnecessary. So what are reasonable measures, and how can you help the jury view the case through your eyes? You must first go to the crime scene and begin reviewing any security efforts that the defendant undertook.
A crucial part of evidence development in these cases is examining the premises and putting the security measures into context. For example, a client was stabbed to death in his aunt’s apartment complex parking lot as he went to the vending machines near the community swimming pool.1 The complex gave a rent-free unit to a courtesy security officer who was also a local police officer and claimed to perform three daily patrols around the property with an enormous dog and a pistol. She also submitted observation reports to management. I was deflated by this proactive security regime until the officer and on-site managers were deposed.
Through public record requests, I obtained the officer’s call schedule for her official police duties for the previous three years. The three daily patrols she claimed she conducted could not be reconciled with her documented obligations for the city police department. The nuisance crimes of vandalism and drug use at the community swimming pool were incompatible with her insistence that once she locked the common area amenities at night, the property was under control. And somehow her fellow officers failed to inform her of four robberies and a carjacking that occurred at the complex while she lived there. At trial, the plaintiff’s counsel was able to expose this façade, and the jury found the complex was 100 percent liable.
In another case, my client was shot in the face at a gas station near the Miami-Dade County Fairgrounds during the annual fair. My first few visits to the property were unremarkable, so I wondered how we could convince any jury that this ordinary gas station should have employed security. So we waited to visit again until the next year’s county fair.
By comparing surveillance video from a normal Friday night with video from the same time and date during the following year’s county fair, we were able to show the massive increase in foot and vehicle traffic during the fair. We did not advocate that there was anything wrong with the gas station itself – but we explained that for two weeks each year, it assumed an entirely different criminal profile, and increased security measures should have been deployed. Understanding your site will help you stay focused on the defendant’s duty to appreciate the foreseeable risk and act on it.
(Pictured: Attorney Christopher Marlowe)
Sometimes, when security is compromised, there will be a debate about whether armed or unarmed security was appropriate for a property. The jury is unlikely to punish a defendant for choosing unarmed over armed guards if the choice was based on intelligence and made after informed deliberations.
Other security decisions become central to the case. Premises owners and managers often use security vendors, who make recommendations for protecting the property against crime. The vendor invariably will have suggested implementing the most comprehensive security system, but the defendant chose a lesser program due to cost. Driving a wedge between the vendor and the property manager becomes very important, and you can do this with the assistance of either entity’s former employees. Defendants usually are not on the same page as their vendors about crime on the premises, the necessary remedies, or the rationale for the choices made.
Familiarity with crimes that occurred on the property is fundamental. Do not rely on crime statistics or grids. Read every police report from the property, going back at least three years from your client’s assault. What may appear to be a simple property crime can yield the greatest notice and foreseeability witnesses. For example, a police report showing theft of a cell phone from a vehicle may appear trivial and unrelated on its face. However, the victim of that property crime often will have reported it to management and felt violated by that intrusion, especially if it happened more than once. The best witness regarding notice of on-premises crimes may be a robbery victim who constantly complained to management.
As the defendant tries to distract your attention from the core issues, refocus the case on specific criminal incidents and what the defendant failed to do in response to each. Make sure to use police reports when deposing the defendant – it will force them to admit, repeatedly, that they either did not know of the crime or that they did not make any changes in response to it. Specific crimes will help you show the jury that your case is not about crime generally or in the city where the property is located – it is about crime on this specific property.
Negligent security cases can consume thousands of hours from inception to conclusion. You must contend with both criminal and civil investigations, witnesses who may reasonably fear retribution, properties in crime-ridden areas, and even clients whose presence at the time of the incident concerns jurors. To get past these difficulties, it is crucial to maintain your focus on proving that the defendant’s security measures were inadequate.
Learn more about The Haggard Law Firm by clicking here
Notes:
1. Almaguer v. MIG Pines Dev., Ltd., No. 08-50972 CA 21 (Fla., Broward Co. Cir., Mar. 25, 2010).
rs represent virtually every industry in the public and private sectors, and organizations of all sizes. From entry-level managers to CSOs to CEOs, from security veterans to consultants and those transitioning from law enforcement or the military, the ASIS community is global and diverse. More than 20,000 industry professionals are expected to attend the conference.
