Kansas Negligent Security Attorney
Put Years of Experience on Your Side
If you sustained injuries on someone else’s property, premises liability law states that the property owner or the person responsible for maintaining the property could be held liable for the injuries if they were a result of a dangerous condition on the property.
Negligent security is a facet of this law, which addresses a specific unsafe condition, relating to criminal and violent acts. For example, if you were assaulted on someone else’s property due to a lack of security, you might be able to file a negligent security claim.
Negligent security suits are based on the duty imposed upon landowners or possessors of property to provide reasonable security measures that protect lawful visitors from foreseeable crimes. This is expected of both commercial and residential landowners, both of which have been successfully sued for negligent security.
However, their duties might differ. A college, for example, has a duty to provide adequate security measures for students at their dormitories. A residential tenant, on the other hand, has control over what happens to guests inside his or her apartment, but might not have a duty to protect guests in the complex’s parking lot.
What is Adequate Security?
There is no set standard for what is considered adequate security, so this will vary from case to case.
Some common security features might include:
- Adequately trained security patrols
- Appropriate lighting
- Functioning security hardware
- Restricting the ability to produce and hand out duplicate keys to common areas
Some states allow for an inference of no negligence if a business takes certain security measures, such as security cameras and the use of a drop safe.
What Do Plaintiffs Need to Prove?
If you are suing for negligent security, you will need to prove the landowner or possessor failed to either exercise care in discovering similar prior criminal activities or failed to provide adequate warnings to visitors.
You will also need to prove:
- You were lawfully on the defendant’s property
- The defendant breached its duty to provide reasonable security
- You were hurt as a result of a third party’s actions, which were foreseeable by the defendant
- You would not have sustained injuries if it were not for the defendant’s breach of duty
- You incurred actual damages
"You will always hold a special place in my heart!"Dear Matt - Thank you and Hutton & Hutton for backing my bill. I truly appreciate your tenacity and ability to make ...
- Julie
Our Results
-
$34,000,000 Personal Injury
Mason v. Texaco, 948 F.2d 1546 (10th Cir. 1991). Otis Mason died of leukemia caused by exposure to benzene, an industrial solvent and gasoline component, for which the jury awarded $34 million.
-
$23,600,000 Personal Injury
Darcy Aves was severely injured during birth, resulting in severe mental and physical retardation, blindness and seizures from Cerebral Palsy. Darcy’s twin sister, Danna, was born healthy. The jury awarded $23.6 million, the largest jury verdict in Kansas and one of the largest personal injury verdicts in the nation.
-
$15,000,000 Personal Injury
Graham v. Wyeth Labs, 666 F.Supp. 1483 (D. Kan. 1987). Michelle Graham had a severe neurological reaction to Wyeth Labs’ DPT vaccine and suffered severe brain damage. The jury awarded $15 million. Wyeth thereafter purified the vaccine.
-
$11,200,000 Personal Injury
O’Gilvie v. International Playtex, 821 F.2d 1438 (10th Cir. 1987). O’Gilvie died from Toxic Shock Syndrome after using Playtex super-absorbent tampons. The jury’s $11.2 million verdict led to the removal from the market of Playtex’s super-absorbent tampons and addition of warnings to packaging.