Crime Victim Attorney Archives - Page 12 of 12

Protecting Employees in High Crime Areas, Employers’ Requirements

Posted on January 3, 2017 by HaggardTeam

Workplace violence tends to grab headlines because the thought of a coworker murdering or maiming colleagues imparts a sense of dread that we do not like to visualize in those around us every working day of the week. More frequent, however, are those crimes of opportunity facing employees in high-risk environments, such as convenience and liquor stores, fast food restaurants and check cashing businesses. The nature of their work requires large amounts of cash on hand, and such businesses are frequently located on major highways to increase foot traffic and customer counts. Those same factors that make the shopping experience easier for the customer help make committing these crimes easier for the would-be robber. The ability to enter the property in a car, and disappear rapidly into a sea of commuter traffic make apprehension much more difficult for law enforcement. Signage in the windows offering discounts and sales often blocks the view of passersby into the windows, making the observation of an ongoing crime more difficult. In the convenience store setting, Florida law acknowledges these realities through F.S. 812.173, the “Convenience Business Security Act.”

Continue reading “Protecting Employees in High Crime Areas, Employers’ Requirements”

Haggard Law Attorneys to Discuss Litigating Accident Cases Involving Uber During CLE Event

Posted on September 7, 2016 by HaggardTeam

The Association for Safe International Travel reports that 37,000 people die in car accidents per year in the United States while another 2.35 million are injured or disabled. An estimated 180,000 people are driving for Uber. That number continues to grow. So with this kind of volume and activity it is inevitable that the number of accidents involving this driving service will rise.

So if a personal injury attorney’s client was injured in a crash involving Uber, what should the lawyer consider when litigating that case?

That is the topic of discussion that will be lead by Haggard Law attorneys Jason Brenner and Todd Michaels during this month’s Florida Justice Association Masters of Justice CLE program.

Uber Duber Do…Your Client Was in an Accident with Uber, Now What Do You Do? is one of the sessions that will be offered to attendees of the program as part of the Auto Negligence Seminar to be conducted on Wednesday, September 28th. There are a few more spots available for this seminar. To learn more about it and register click here. The FJA Masters of Justice Program will be held in Orlando from September 28th through the 30th.

Attending this year’s FJA Masters of Justice program is a great way to renew the excitement and focus on your mission as a personal injury attorney. Make plans NOW to register to attend to ensure you have the strategies and techniques in your toolbox that have proven to work for other attorneys in civil litigation cases. You’ll be sure to take away valuable information and innovative ideas that can immediately aid you in your efforts to assist your clients in their cases.

7 Shot in Jacksonville Apartment Complex With History of Murder/Violent Crime and Poor Security

Posted on August 10, 2016 by HaggardTeam

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

Evidence Development In Negligent Security Cases

Posted on June 11, 2016 by HaggardTeam

Authored By The Haggard Law Firm’s Christopher L. Marlowe

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).

Anatomy of Your Case

Posted on June 29, 2015 by HaggardTeam

Most people don’t know how a lawsuit works until it happens. These are the stages of a suit, and how we work with you to improve the chances of a satisfactory result. In a small firm like ours, the attorneys, investigators, paralegals and secretaries work together to represent you. Sometimes, more than one lawyer will actively work on your case. We believe this team approach makes the best use of everyone’s talents to better serve our clients. www.haggardlawfirm.com

These are the stages of your case:

INTERVIEW
INVESTIGATION
NEGOTIATION
FILING SUIT
PLEADINGS
DISCOVERY
TRIAL
UPDATING
COMMUNICATING

Interview

The interview is the first contact that you will have with us. Anything you tell us is protected by attorney-client privilege. Our conversations stay confidential. This is fundamental to our profession. We know it will encourage you to be candid and uninhibited in telling us everything you can about your problem. For example, in the average case, we need to know about your medical history and any other accidents and claims. Once we’ve heard your full story, we can evaluate your legal rights against those who may be responsible for your injury.

Investigaton

After the interview, we will begin to investigate your claim. Our aim is to identify those who can help in presenting your claim in court. We attempt to identify and find witnesses and preserve evidence. While we’re investigating the facts surrounding your injury, we will gather pertinent medical records and other data regarding the injury and the circumstances surrounding it. If you have lost, or continue to lose, wages because of prolonged absence from work as a result of your injuries, we will obtain copies of your work attendance records. For this, we need written authorizations from you to obtain evidence of your earnings, wages, and/or business profits if it is appropriate to do so. If a claim of lost earnings is involved, we will eventually be required to substantiate that claim with these records. In some instances, you may have to produce prior tax returns. On occasion, in our investigations we may come upon information adverse to your case. If so, at the appropriate time, we will explain to you the effects of this adverse information on your case and tell you what to expect from our representation.

Negotiation

Once we have completed the investigation, we’ll be in a position to evaluate more accurately your claim’s worth. This allows us to begin negotiating with insurance representatives and/or lawyers to try to settle your claim.

As soon as possible, we usually notify the other party or parties involved by letter informing them that we represent you, and that they are not to contact you directly. We request that they contact us regarding negotiation or settlement. In appropriate cases, we will make every effort to settle your case without the necessity of filing suit with all its expenses and delays. In other cases, we may decide that it is better to immediately file a formal lawsuit rather than attempt to settle the case before filing suit.

Each case is different, and we make this determination on the basis of each case’s circumstances. As we review your case, we will form judgments about the predicted outcome both in terms of winning and value. To win, we must convince a jury that the wrongdoer was careless, or that the product was unnecessarily or unexpectedly hazardous, or that professional conduct in treating was substandard.

At the same time, those who represent the wrongdoer (called the defendant after suit was filed) will try to defeat your case, or diminish its value substantially, by criticizing you as having been careless, inattentive, or negligent in putting yourself in the predicament that led to injury. Necessarily, there is an unavoidable uncertainty in trying a lawsuit for you. The people who make up a jury are different. Some may be inclined to sympathize and identify with you greatly. Others may be unsympathetic by virtue of their own experience and background. Our objective is to obtain adequate compensation for you. Since our firm’s members have represented thousands of injured people for more than 30 years, we’ve developed a wealth of experience in trying and evaluating cases. As you might expect, the legal proof and strength of your case affects the value of any judgment. The severity and permanence of any injuries, together with the costs of medical treatment, and wage and income loss all enter into our assessment of the your case’s value.

Most cases settle. Insurance companies conduct investigations just as we do. Under the rules of discovery following the filing of a lawsuit, we can learn as much about the other side’s case as they can about ours. Because of this free exchange of information, lawyers from both sides will have an accurate prediction of the evidence in most cases. Insurance companies will compare your case to similar cases in our area and nationwide.

The lines of communication between you and our office for negotiated settlements always will remain open. Things may change during the course of representing you. While we are eager to proceed to trial on your behalf, sometimes witnesses become unavailable due to sickness, death, or relocation. Witnesses in trial may forget important details, change their minds, or become frightened by questioning. Doctors may disagree on the nature and extent of injuries. These factors, and many others, affect the value of your case both during settlement negotiations and in front of a jury.

Settlements can be reached at any stage of your case, even after the start of a trial or even after a verdict. It is common to settle a case while a matter is on appeal. We will give you our best advice as to whether you should accept or reject any offer or settlement. Some people are satisfied with an offer we consider low. Others are dissatisfied with an offer that we recommend accepting. As your attorney, we serve as your agent. We will give our recommendations with your best interests at heart, but will respect your decision.

Filing Suit

Frequently, settlement negotiations do not succeed unless suit is filed. That way, the insurance company is fully aware that you are serious in pursuing your claim to a just conclusion, by jury trial if necessary. At other times, we know that, with certain types of cases or with certain insurance companies, it is better to file suit at the outset rather than waste time conducting meaningless settlement negotiations. If settlement negotiations fail, we generally will file suit on your behalf without further consultation with you. To do this, we draft a formal legal paper called a complaint and file it with the appropriate court.

Pleadings

Every lawsuit starts with the filing of a formal complaint. A complaint describes the basis of the case in specific legal terminology. The defendants respond in a legal pleading, called an Answer. They usually deny each allegation in the complaint and set forth their defenses. Defendants, in return, often make a number of motions to request more information to be placed in their pleading.

Discovery

While your suit is pending, formal legal discovery takes place. The insurance company lawyer will send us written questions, called interrogatories, for you to answer. We usually will provide as much information to answer those questions as we can from the investigation already in our file.

Then we will forward those questions to you for review and completion. Your answers will be sworn under oath, and copies of them will be filed with the court and with the lawyer who submitted them. We also will send written interrogatories to the opposing parties requiring them to answer under oath. Sworn interrogatories are sent by both sides in a case. They require detailed answers in writing to various question. Each side has the right to require the other to produce documents or tangible items upon request. Usually, the other side has 30 days to respond, but this can vary, depending on the type of discovery used.

Once those questions and answers have been exchanged, we conduct depositions. A deposition is a formal statement, under oath, given in response to questioning by the lawyers in the case. Defense attorneys have the right to take your deposition, to ask you about what happened, how you have been injured, and other background information. We also have the right to take depositions of the defendants. Depositions of witnesses to the accident or injuries may also be taken. We will send more complete instructions about depositions when yours is scheduled, and we will review your case and expected testimony with you on the day your deposition is conducted. In a personal injury suit, you may also be required to submit to an examination by an insurance company doctor to evaluate your injuries. Under certain conditions, you may also be required to produce for the insurance company photographs, materials, documents and records connected with your claim and authorizations for the insurance company lawyer to get your past and present employment and medical records.

At the same time the defense is learning what your case is about, we learn are about the other side’s case by using the same legal mechanisms – interrogatories, depositions, requests for admission and requests for production.

Trial

Most injury cases do not go to trial. Still, if settlement negotiations fail, the case goes to trial. It is impossible to predict when a trial will take place. Each judge has a different trial schedule. The trial could take place anywhere from eight months to 18 months from the time it is first requested to be schedule.

A request for trial cannot be made until the end of the pleading stage. Once a trial scheduled, it is often rescheduled – and often more than once – through a continuance granted by the judge. Defendants will usually try to do everything to delay the trial, as the insurance companies make interest on the money they have to pay. Our job is to try to move it along as quickly as possible.

About 30 days before the trial, a pretrial conference takes place. At this conference before the judge, each side names all of its witnesses and lists all of its exhibits. The trial will be tried before six jurors selected at random. A panel of jurors will be selected with their names drawn by lot, and attorneys will examine them. Each side is entitled to challenge potential jurors for selection, with six selected at the end.

Updating

It is imperative that you keep us advised of names and addresses of all doctors, hospitals and other health-care providers that treat you for injuries. Always send us copies of medical bills and other expenses relating to your case. You should also let us know generally about all subsequent health problems, so we can determine whether they affect your case or not.

INFORM US IMMEDIATELY ABOUT ANY SUDDEN CHANGE IN YOUR HEALTH, YOUR ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER, OR INFORMATION YOU HAVE CONCERNING WITNESSES OR EVIDENCE IN THE CASE!

Communicating

We will contact you whenever fact questions arise during our investigation, or differ from your impression the accident or your injuries. Also, we will call whenever there are concrete offers of settlement. Occasionally you will want to call us. We are happy to hear from you, and we will do our best to answer your calls immediately and will return them as soon as possible.

HAGGARD LAW FIRM OBTAINS $1.6 MILLION VERDICT

Posted on July 26, 2011 by HaggardTeam

The Haggard Law Firm’s team recently won an incredibly hard fought battle for sexual assault victim, Amanda Slone, when a Broward County jury returned a verdict on Thursday, June 23, for $1.6 million after three weeks of trial. This is an incredible journey where defendant Cornerstone Residential Management, which is one of the largest commercial property management companies in the country, brutally attacked Amanda Slone’s story and her family’s background in trying to secure a court victory. During the discovery phase of the case over 37 depositions were taken across several states.

This is a victory not only for Amanda Slone, but perhaps more importantly for sexual assault victims, as the defense incredulously claimed that Amanda had made up her story of the brutal rape that occurred on September 27, 2008 at Imperial States Mobile Home Park.

“I understand that it was his job to defend his client,” Slone said. “But it made me feel horrible, being told I’m a liar, that I made the whole thing up.”

For far too long sexual assault victims have had to live with the stigma of guilt, shame and questions about the worst day of their lives. Unfortunately, Cornerstone and its lawyers tried the same tactic against Amanda Slone.

Amanda Slone v. Cornerstone Residential Management

VERDICT $1.6 Million – Negligent Security

It was 5:00 am when Amanda was awoken by the sight of the assailant’s handgun. The assailant demanded Amanda’s money and that no noise be made or she and her Grandfather, who was sleeping in the other room, would be executed. After informing the assailant she had no money, the assailant violently grabbed Amanda, continued to point the pistol at her body, and dragged her out of the trailer’s back door.

The assailant commanded Amanda at gunpoint to walk North, away from the trailer. Amanda walked through the Imperial Estates Mobile Home Park while the assailant continued to point his handgun directly at her back. After walking one and a half blocks in search for the perfect area to commit his heinous criminal deed, the assailant chose a dark wooded area on the Imperial Estates property and sexually assaulted her.

The Imperial Estates Mobile Home Park, from which Amanda Slone was abducted and raped, was dangerous. There was at least one stabbing, a shooting, another attempted sexual assault, and an attempted abduction of a young girl from her bicycle, all within a few years leading up to Amanda Slone’s assault. The police have testified that this was the most troublesome property within their patrol route.

The defense retained former FBI Agent, Greg McCrary, as a Security expert. Unfortunately, Mr. McCrary went further than giving an Opinion that the Defendants had Adequate Security. Mr. McCrary actually changed his Opinion at trial and testified that he felt a Crime did not occur. Thankfully, the jury rejected Mr. McCrary’s new testimony. Throughout the case, the Defendant maintained that it owed no duty to Amanda Slone whatsoever, relying upon the Florida Mobile Home Act for this argument. Despite the well settled nature of this issue, the Defendant insisted in its court filings that the 4^thDistrict Court of Appeals “law clerks [failed] to undertake the same basic legal research” as the Defendant.

Hopefully, this Verdict will compensate Amanda Slone for the horrific experience that she went through on September 27, 2008, and continues till this day. It is also the hope of The Haggard Law Firm that this Verdict and others like it will empower Sexual Assault Victims in their daily battles with the Stigma that society and unscrupulous Corporations and their agents continue to label upon them.

The Haggard Law Firm team was lead by attorney Christopher Marlowe along with co-counsel Michael Haggard. Attorney Jason Brenner and legal assistant Nory Lopez also assisted with the case and trial.

330 Alhambra Circle

(305) 446-5700

(305) 446-5700

Category: Crime Victim Attorney