Did a security failure contribute to the tragic deaths of Nathaniel Davis and Steven Anderson, Jr. and are justice and compensation available to their families?
Security measures are under scrutiny after an altercation erupted in gunfire outside a College Hill bar Sunday, September 23, 2018, claiming the lives of Steven Anderson Jr., 28, and Nathaniel Davis, 29.
Police told the Cincinnati Enquirer, “there was an ‘altercation’ inside the bar which then carried over outside.” The media investigation reveals “[p]olice have been called to the bar twice before this month” for reports of “shots fired” and “a disorderly crowd.”
“This club needs to be shut down,” Steven Anderson Sr. told WCPO 9. Tragically, his son leaves behind “three daughters, ranging from ages 8 to 13.”
Did negligent security contribute to this College Hill bar parking lot shooting? We represent individuals and families who have suffered a tragic loss or injury as a consequence of negligent property security. Read Our Legal Take below to find out if the families of Mr. Davis and Mr. Anderson may have a legal avenue for justice and claims for substantial compensation in Ohio, or call now for a free consultation with our legal team: 888.842.1616.
Our Legal Take
Bar and parking lot patrons have a right to feel safe and secure while on the premises. The Murray Law Firm questions the level of security provided on the property and whether this tragedy may have been prevented.
- Were any attempts made by bar management or security to safely and separately remove those involved in the initial dispute from the premises, prior to an escalation to gunfire? Were police called at the start of the initial altercation?
- What additional security measures, such as weapons screenings, bright parking lot lighting, surveillance cameras, and off-duty police patrols, were implemented by the bar and parking lot owners following media reports of prior police calls to the property?
Generally, property owners are required to protect all those legally on the premises from any foreseeable harm. Should the facts of this matter reveal that the bar or parking lot owners failed to provide adequate security to protect those on its premises, the families of Nathaniel Davis and Steven Anderson, Jr. may seek justice and elect to pursue legal claims for their wrongful deaths.
Based upon its prior successful experience in handling security negligence claims on behalf of victims and their families, The Murray Law Firm suggests that photographs and a thorough, unbiased inspection of the property will need to be performed immediately, before any evidence may be repaired, damaged or destroyed. Given the complexities of pursuing a negligent security case, it is imperative that the victims’ families retain an experienced attorney who can ensure the preservation of any and all evidence that may support such a claim.
We’ve Recovered Millions for Victims of Bar and Nightclub Security Negligence…Contact us Now for a Free Consultation.
The Murray Law Firm has an extensive and successful record representing victims of violence and security negligence. We have recovered millions of dollars for our Clients, and recently obtained a $29.25 million dollar verdict for a victim of an unsafe property. We offer our legal assistance, if desired.
We represent our Clients on a contingency agreement, which generally means that no fees or payments are owed until and unless we recover. Anyone seeking further information or legal representation is encouraged to contact us via e-mail (click here) or by telephone at 888.842.1616. Consultations are free and confidential.
Choosing the Right Attorney
Selecting the right attorney for you or your family is highly important. You must feel confident that the attorney you hire has a complete understanding of the law applicable to your particular case, and has successful experience in handling such cases.
Important: Do not hire a lawyer who has violated the Rules of Professional Conduct!!!
You should not hire an attorney who calls you or visits you unsolicited, or anyone that contacts you directly to offer legal services. This activity is strictly prohibited by Rule 7.3 of the American Bar Association (ABA) Model Rules of Professional Conduct, which states as follows:
– RULE 7.3, ABA MODEL RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.
If an attorney, or someone acting on behalf of an attorney, contacts you in this manner, that attorney is in violation of this Rule. This unethical and unprofessional activity on the part of the lawyer is good sign that you should stay away. It is imperative that you are represented by an attorney who is capable of advocating for you within the confines of the law, and an attorney who fails to abide by the Rules of Professional Conduct is probably not the best fit. In fact, any such attorney should be immediately reported to the local State Bar Association. If you have been contacted in such an unsolicited manner, contact us and we’ll assist you in filing a report.
Contingency Fees Disclaimer: “Contingent attorneys’ fees refers only to those fees charged by attorneys for their legal services. Such fees are not permitted in all types of cases. Court costs and other additional expenses of legal action usually must be paid by the client.”