Invest in your success.
JVRA helps lawyers win cases by providing critical information you can use to establish precedent, determine demand and win arguments.
Verdict range $100,000 - $500,000
ARTICLE ID 169610
$________ GROSS ADVISORY Confidential - Negligent security - Plaintiff attacked during robbery in Bahamian hotel room - Rib fractures - Collapsed lung - Continued breathing problems - 30% comparative negligence found.
Palm Beach County, Florida
The plaintiff alleged that there was inadequate security
at the defendants resort hotel in the Bahamas to prevent a
robbery and assault upon the plaintiff. The defense argued that
the plaintiff was comparatively negligent and also disputed the
extent of the injuries which he sustained. The case was
bifurcated and tried first on liability in August of ________ and
then damages.
The plaintiff was a guest at the defendants hotel & casino in
Freeport, Bahamas in ________ when he claimed that his hotel room was
robbed by at least three Bahamian males. The plaintiff alleged
that there had been prior crimes in and around the hotel. The
plaintiff also contended that, although there were security
cameras in the defendants casino, there were no operable cameras
near the hotel hallways or rooms. In addition the plaintiff
alleged that there were no security guards on the premises and
that the ongoing construction at the hotel created a situation
where the hallway doors did not automatically lock when they
closed. The plaintiff contended that the assailants should not
have been able to gain access to the guest room area of the
hotel.
The plaintiff, age 61 at the time, contended that he was beaten
during the robbery and sustained fractured ribs which pierced a
lung. The plaintiff complained of continuing breathing
difficulties as a result of the collapsed lung he sustained.
The defense argued that the plaintiffs roommate opened the door
when the robbers knocked. The roommate contended that he thought
it was his brother who was staying in a nearby room. The
plaintiffs roommate was listed as a Fabre defendant on the
verdict form. The defendant argued that, had the roommate used
the "peep hole" and/or the safety latch, he would have seen the
assailants before the door was opened. The defense stressed that
the peep hole and safety latch were designed to prevent these
types of occurrences.
The defense also argued that the plaintiffs conduct, including
wearing jewelry and displaying cash in the casino and hotel,
attracted the attention of the assailants. The defendant claimed
that the plaintiff negligently fought the assailants, whereas the
roommate who did not fight them was not harmed.
On damages, the defendant stressed that the plaintiff had
sustained a prior lung injury as a result of being exposed to
hydrochloric acid. The defense contended that the plaintiffs
breathing difficulties were associated with his prior lung
injury.
The jury found the defendant 20% negligent, the Fabre defendant
(roommate) 50% negligent and the plaintiff 30% comparatively
negligent. In the damages phase of the trial, the plaintiff was
awarded $________ in gross damages. The case settled for a
confidential sum minutes before the jury returned and the court
allowed an advisory verdict.
5 ways to win with JVRA
JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:
- Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
- Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
- Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
- Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
- Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.
Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.