IMPORTANT POINTS IN INVESTIGATING
SECURITY NEGLIGENCE AND PREMISES LIABILITY
Compiled And Edited By Ralph Thomas



Click For Book Review Of:
Security, Adequate....Or Not? The Complete Guide To Premises Liability Litigation
 
 
One of the hottest trends in private investigation practice in recent years as been investigations centered around premises liability. These types of cases usually center around failure to provide adequate security.

In Chris McGoey's new book, Security, Adequate....Or Not? The Complete Guide To Premises Liability Litigation, he presents five points that must be proven, and therefore must be investigated in order to show a claim for security negligence.
1) A legal duty was owed to take certain cares to people coming upon the property by the owner and /or leaseholder.
 
2) Either a crime of an assaultive nature or a danger on the land or premises that could have the potential of causing harm was foreseeable in the eyes of a reasonable man.
 
 
3) Failure to provide a reasonable level of security needed to counter any crime of an assaultive nature or danger was not provided by the land owner and/or lessee.
 
 
4) The failure on the part of the land owner and/or lessee was a proximate cause for the damage suffered in the claim.
 
5) Actual damages were suffered as a result of this breach of duty.
 

 

 
Thus inadequate security is a claim for negligence. That is, the owner/lessee was negligent for not providing adequate security measures for foreseeable harm.
 
Since negligence depends upon certain degrees of care imposed upon the tortfeasor, the degree
of care required can and often does depend upon the relationship between the two parties
involved. In other words, different yardsticks of measurement can be used against the
tortfeasor depending upon the relationship between the two parties. Facts concerning the
relationship between parties involved need to be established to determine the "yardstick of
measurement". Such facts will establish the relationship into one of three classifications.

A. invitee
B. licensee
C. trespasser

 

 
 
 
INVITEE: An invitee is either a public invitee or a business visitor. A public invitee is one
whom enters upon the defendant's land being a member of the general population. He enters
upon the defendant's land as the land is opened to the general public. A business visitor is one
who enters upon the land for some kind of direct or indirect business dealing with the owner.
An invitee is given the greatest degree of protection by the courts as far an negligence is
concerned. Moreover, a business visitor is given the greatest degree of protection within the
invitee concept. In other words, the degree of care might be different when a person is given a
ride in a vehicle if he compensated the owner for the ride than if he was given a ride for free.
Such hair-line cases come up daily in the field of negligence.
 
 
 
LICENSEE: A licensee is a person whom enters upon property with an implied or express
consent. An example of a licensee would be a social quest. Under most circumstances a
licensee is expected to accept the property as he finds it and to look out for his own welfare.
Under such circumstances, the knowledge of any danger known by the licensee will preclude
the licensee from any type of recovery. However, the owner will be required to inform and
give warning to the licensee of any danger. Thus, the defendant would have a legal duty to
inform the licensee of any dangers.
 
 
 
TRESPASSER: A trespasser is one who enters upon property without the implied or
express consent of the owner. The owner or possessor of the land can not be held liable for
any harm done by a trespasser and owes no duty to act as the reasonably prudent man would.

RELATED TOPICS AND AIDS
PREMISES LIABILITY-THE BURDEN OF PROOF
By Pattie James, C.L.I.

OVERVIEW OF NEGLIGENCE FOR THE INVESTIGATOR
By Ralph D. Thomas


EXTENSIVE BOOK REVIEW
SECURITY ADEQUATE....OR NOT
THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO PREMISES LIABILITY LITIGATION

RETURN TO LATEST NAIS NEWSLETTER INDEX