Philadelphia Jury Awards $5.5 million for Family Members of Slain Hahnemann Hospital Parking Lot Attendant

A Philadelphia jury awarded $5.5 million for the family of a man shot to death in 2006 at a Hahnemann University Hospital parking-lot booth in a case that apparantly revealed an appalling lack of security according to the attorneys who tried the case for the surviving family.  After the jury reached a decision in September 2008, the family's attorney advised the media that the security breaches were truly staggering for any institution let alone a hospital.  The victim, a 18 year old Roman Catholic High School graduate and the son of a Philadelphia police officer, was killed after being shot in the chest during an attempted robbery in the lot on Race Street near Broad in Center City.

While spokesmen for the Hospital expressed sympathy for the family after the tragic events, the slain victim's attorney criticized what he found to be the lack of security measures at the parking lot especially considering that an armed robbery had taken place at the same booth just 12 days before his client was murdered.

Evidence presented at trial revealed that Hahnemann failed to make the cashier's booth bulletproof and failed to change the parking lot system to operate unmanned during the unsafe night hours.  Furthermore, although security patrols were increased, evidence showed that the last time was at 7:56 p.m., over two and a half hours before the victim was killed.  In addition, a surveillance camera that overlooked the cashier's booth wasn't even being watched by anyone in security.

Stabbling Outside Philadelphia Center City Night Club Needs Immediate Investigation If Claim Against Owner Is Considered

A 25 year old man was stabbed and in critical condition at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital after he was stabbed in the stomach with a 12-inch knife.  The incident took place after an altercation that took place while leaving "Bump", a "luxe lounge" in Center City Philadephia at 13th and Locust Streets.

If a case of inadequate or lax security is to be considered, the first task after performing a preliminary screening of the claim is to determine the level of crime in the attempt to determine foreseeability of this crime to the potential defendants.  To do this, police reports of the crime on the premises (first) and in the surrounding areas (second) must be obtained.  The first source of crime record data are the printout of calls for service or "grids" and then obtaining the police reports of the crimes to get the specifics of the crimes.  Lastly, the internal records of the potential defendant will eventually have to be reviewed. 

All of this involves prompt investigation by qualified experts.

Fatal Stabbing at Vy Da Sports Club in South Philadelphia Demands Immediate Investigation If Lawsuit Against the Bar is Considered

In the early morning hours of November 2, 2008 two men were knifed, one fatally, in a fight outside the Vy Da Sports Club in South Philadelphia, following a fight outside the club around 1 a.m.

The question of whether the Club owner has any responsibility or liability for these murders will be determined by quick and competent investigation of the circumstances of the fight and whether the premises had inadequate security in place that would have prevented the killings. 

In any case involving inadequate security of premises, where it's a Club like Vy Da Sports, a parking lot, bar, apartment complex or other premise, investigators need to consider the following:

1.  Current Code Violations
2.  Past Code Violations
3.  Multiple Premise Violations in the past
4.  Interviews with former tenants and former employees
5.  Internal and external marketing materials about the premises
6.  Advertisements in local community papers, brochures and magazines about the premises

This type of early investigation could make the case that adequate security precautions because of known risks to the owner of Clubs such as Vy Da Sports would have prevented these assaults that ended up with one patron dead.

Your Home May be Your Castle But Landlords Have Limited Liability, If Any, in Pennsylvania For Criminal Acts of Third Parties

A very brave and courageous woman called our office the other day because her landlord was suing her for the damage to the house she was renting which happened to have been caused by two burglars who tried to break into her house, shot the woman ten times through a poorly secured door in a known dangerous neighbor in Coatesville, Pennsylvania.

The woman sustained serious and permanent injuries but she says she was lucky because her quick thinking probably kept her two kids from getting shot and possibly killed too.  When burglars tried to kick in her back door, the woman acted quickly, even after being shot, to get on the ground and put her feet up against the poorly secured door to prevent the burglars from further entry.  She was shot repeatedly again but when her boyfried arrived, the burglars left.  Several weeks later, the burglars were at it again at a motel in West Chester when they were confronted by police and one of them was killed in a gun battle.  The other burglar remains in custody.

With over $200,000 in unpaid medical bills, lost wages and her landlord suing her, the woman was referred to us by a local Crime Victims' Advocate organization to see what other rights she might have.  We are helping her with the landlord tenant issues, but unfortunately we had to advise her that no cause of action existed against the landlord for failing to provide a safe rental property.

In 1984 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Feld v. Merriam  denied a claim where a resident was assault in her apartment's parking garage.  The Court held that a residential landlord cannot be civilly liable for a crime attack which occurred in a private area not open to the public.  Absent an agreement to provide security or undertaking to provide security and then negligently performing that, the Court found no liability on the part of the apartment owner.

The exceptions in these cases need to be considered.  But for this woman, no such exception existed.