Someone I know had an issue with neglect (and injury) in a retail store recently and I wanted to see if the board might have a recommendation on a Houston area attorney that can at least look and determine if there's a case there. The retail store in question is a national brand that had been warned by other customers apparently of this potential issue and never resolved it so its going to take going up the chain a bit. Any recommendations that are proven commodities would be most helpful.

Thanks in Advance.

Jimmy Conway said:

---

Someone I know had an issue with neglect (and injury) in a retail store recently and I wanted to see if the board might have a recommendation on a Houston area attorney that can at least look and determine if there's a case there. The retail store in question is a national brand that had been warned by other customers apparently of this potential issue and never resolved it so its going to take going up the chain a bit. Any recommendations that are proven commodities would be most helpful.

Thanks in Advance.

---

Name does not checkout, the real Jimmy Conway would not need an attorney...

Brashears Miller. Sean Miller is a buddy of mine and he'd be great for that.

ooh yeah The Abogado Perro has a nice billboard!

Also Willie D Powells got a new billboard. Try him too

Can't get into too many details but here is the general. Customer was leaving a retail store walking to his car. As he got to the car, he was assaulted and robbed. The retail store is a stand alone and not in a shopping center. This happened a while back but it just came to light to the victim this had actually happened multiple times outside the store, and the store was aware of it, and never posted warnings, never put up cameras , never got security, or anything like that. It happened at least 4 times that the victim has been told of (maybe by the same culprits) and store management has acknowledged its happened more than once. There were some physical injuries that healed but dude is still dealing with some emotional/psychological side affects ptsd type stuff.

Seems like you'd have better luck mentioning to the store that you think it's time to get the media involved.

From what you've said, the local news Loves to get involved in this kind of stuff.

In

BMX Bandit said:

---

phideaux_2003 said:

---

Based on that information it doesn't sound like they have much case. Unless the lot is protected/fenced/patrolled etc, they hold no liability. It's no different then being assaulted on the highway or some other public space.

I'm no expert and I do recommend getting a professional opinion but in my somewhat educated amateur opinion, I'm not sure it'll go anywhere.

---

that was clear from your first paragraph

---

By all means, weigh in.

I am an expert on corporate security and we write our security policies based on the advice of our Fortune 500 legal department. I'm merely echoing what our legal team has told me, hence me personally not being the expert.

At any rate, I'm curious to see what a prosecutor would say. I have a hard time imagining any legitimate culpability could be established.

I mean if I'm parked in their parking lot and a hailstorm damages my car, are they responsible for damages for not having covered parking? No...

He's not asking about criminal liability. He's asking about civil, so prosecutor doenst matter

property owner who "controls the premises does have a duty to use ordinary care to protect invitees from criminal acts of third parties if he knows or has reason to know of an unreasonable and foreseeable risk of harm to the invitee

IIn determining whether the occurrence of certain criminal conduct on a landowner's property should have been foreseen, courts should consider whether any criminal conduct previously occurred on or near the property, how recently it occurred, how often it occurred, how similar the conduct was to the conduct on the property, and what publicity was given the occurrences to indicate that the landowner knew or should have known about them. These are called the "timberwalk" factors

Now, these are not easy cases to win. They are difficult because generally there is no duty to protect others from criminal acts of third parties.

But if the Timberwalk factors all show the property owner had a reason to protect invitees, he can't escape liability by claiming he didn't have security or lights in the parking lot. (That would probably hurt his case)

Ciboag96 said:

---

Jimmy Conway said:

---

Can't get into too many details but here is the general. Customer was leaving a retail store walking to his car. As he got to the car, he was assaulted and robbed. The retail store is a stand alone and not in a shopping center. This happened a while back but it just came to light to the victim this had actually happened multiple times outside the store, and the store was aware of it, and never posted warnings, never put up cameras , never got security, or anything like that. It happened at least 4 times that the victim has been told of (maybe by the same culprits) and store management has acknowledged its happened more than once. There were some physical injuries that healed but dude is still dealing with some emotional/psychological side affects ptsd type stuff.

---

Tell you friend Welcome to Houston. And don't shop anymore at the Target on Sawyer.

---

I like how you went for Sawyer Target instead of Dunvale Walmart. I guess because you know for sure you'll get robbed at the Dunvale Walmart?

Jimmy Conway said:

---

Can't get into too many details but here is the general. Customer was leaving a retail store walking to his car. As he got to the car, he was assaulted and robbed. The retail store is a stand alone and not in a shopping center. This happened a while back but it just came to light to the victim this had actually happened multiple times outside the store, and the store was aware of it, and never posted warnings, never put up cameras , never got security, or anything like that. It happened at least 4 times that the victim has been told of (maybe by the same culprits) and store management has acknowledged its happened more than once. There were some physical injuries that healed but dude is still dealing with some emotional/psychological side affects ptsd type stuff.

---

This sounds like the CVS at Philippine and Gessner according to our Nextdoor..seriously could be any store in Houston.

wessimo said:

---

Ciboag96 said:

---

Jimmy Conway said:

---

Can't get into too many details but here is the general. Customer was leaving a retail store walking to his car. As he got to the car, he was assaulted and robbed. The retail store is a stand alone and not in a shopping center. This happened a while back but it just came to light to the victim this had actually happened multiple times outside the store, and the store was aware of it, and never posted warnings, never put up cameras , never got security, or anything like that. It happened at least 4 times that the victim has been told of (maybe by the same culprits) and store management has acknowledged its happened more than once. There were some physical injuries that healed but dude is still dealing with some emotional/psychological side affects ptsd type stuff.

---

Tell you friend Welcome to Houston. And don't shop anymore at the Target on Sawyer.

---

I like how you went for Sawyer Target instead of Dunvale Walmart. I guess because you know for sure you'll get robbed at the Dunvale Walmart?

---

You get robbed before you pull in the parking lot at that Wal-Mart. If you actually make it to the store, then you get shot or stabbed.


I think your buddy has enough to talk to a lawyer. Like the excellent summary of the law above suggests, it will be difficult but not impossible to make a case. There may be a damages issue that makes it less attractive to a contingency fee lawyer, unless your buddy has actually seen someone about PTSD and has a diagnosis. Publicity avoidance means a lot to some businesses, so they may respond to a demand letter.

BMX Bandit said:

---

He's not asking about criminal liability. He's asking about civil, so prosecutor doenst matter

property owner who "controls the premises does have a duty to use ordinary care to protect invitees from criminal acts of third parties if he knows or has reason to know of an unreasonable and foreseeable risk of harm to the invitee

IIn determining whether the occurrence of certain criminal conduct on a landowner's property should have been foreseen, courts should consider whether any criminal conduct previously occurred on or near the property, how recently it occurred, how often it occurred, how similar the conduct was to the conduct on the property, and what publicity was given the occurrences to indicate that the landowner knew or should have known about them. These are called the "timberwalk" factors

Now, these are not easy cases to win. They are difficult because generally there is no duty to protect others from criminal acts of third parties.

But if the Timberwalk factors all show the property owner had a reason to protect invitees, he can't escape liability by claiming he didn't have security or lights in the parking lot. (That would probably hurt his case)

---

There's a helpful answer. Thanks!

Quote:

---

Also Willie D Powells got a new billboard. Try him too

---

I love that billboard.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets a kick out of it

https://www.abrahamwatkins.com/

nm....i re-read your post....