Shooting Victims' Lawsuit Against El
Paso Walmart Tests Security Responsibility Of Retail Landlords
A family of four besieged by gunfire at a
Walmart Supercenter in El Paso on Aug. 3 is at the center of a lawsuit filed
against Walmart Inc., WalMart Stores Texas LLC and the shooter, Patrick Wood
Crusius.
In
the suit, shooting victims Jessica and Guillermo Garcia — who remains in
critical condition after 13 surgeries — challenge a long-standing belief that
retailers and shopping center owners aren't responsible for violent acts on
their premises. Their suit alleges Walmart had no active security on-site during
the mass killing, and contends that this lack was negligent.
The Garcias' case against Walmart could serve as a bellwether for security in
retail and test the high burden of proof plaintiffs usually face when trying to
make a landlord, property manager or business owner liable for violence on their
property.
The Current Retail Security Landscape
While Walmart did not answer Bisnow's inquiry as to whether it had security on
site at the El Paso shooting location,
news media reports and the Garcia lawsuit say no discernible security was on
the premises when the gunman entered the front door and launched his attack.
El Paso Police spokesman Sgt. Enrique Carrillo told Bisnow Walmart previously
had off-duty officers at El Paso Walmarts, but it stopped that practice sometime
prior to the August shooting spree. Since the incident, the retailer is now
using the services of off-duty El Paso police again, Carrillo said.
Walmart spokesperson Randy Hargrove told Bisnow the retailer has not publicly
disclosed its internal process for determining security needs at each store, but
said Walmart has a robust process for deciding store security needs in the form
of security guards, off-duty police officers and non-uniformed officers on store
premises.
Bisnow visited roughly 25 stores in Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston this month,
including several Walmarts, Dick's Sporting Goods, Lowe's, Best Buys, Targets,
Home Depots, Costcos and Walmart-affiliated Sam's Clubs, and observed security
guards at only three locations.
One Houston-area Walmart had an unarmed uniformed security guard inside the
store and a uniformed guard patrolling the parking lot in a marked pickup truck.
The patrolling guard told Bisnow he had been instructed not to speak to media or
he would be fired. Bisnow also came into contact with a security patrol car
driving outside a Dick's Sporting Goods location at one Dallas-area mixed-use
retail destination.
And
at a Target and Best Buy-anchored power center in the Houston area, a uniformed
guard patrolling in a cart told Bisnow his company keeps a regular patrol in the
parking lot from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 a.m. daily, looking for “anything abnormal.”
He was unarmed and said he was instructed to call the police directly for
“anything really serious.”
But at the other nearly two dozen locations, Bisnow found no clear active
security at the front entrances or in the parking lots of the majority of
stores. Bisnow wandered through many of the stores without coming in contact
with security officers, although we wouldn't be able to detect officers or
guards in plain clothes.
On-site security in most cases was limited to cameras and metal detectors at
several sites, based on Bisnow's observations. An employee of one Dallas-area
Walmart told Bisnow the store relies entirely on cameras for its security.
Bisnow also visited a Walmart in the Duluth, Georgia, area where on-duty police
officers are typically parked out front, but when Bisnow arrived, no officers
were there and no security was spotted anywhere in the store. In addition,
Bisnow found no visible guard presence when visiting a Walmart in Westminster,
California, although the publication is unable to determine whether
non-uniformed guards were present.
“That’s fairly common [not to have guards at retail centers]," said Jeff
Bettinson, a 19-year property management veteran and owner of iTrip Vacations
Salt Lake City. "Mostly what they have is loss prevention and different
companies will do it a different way."
Bettinson, who previously managed a major mall and retail strip and power
centers in Utah, said unless a store is known for being located in a
crime-infested neighborhood, armed guards or the hiring of off-duty police
officers is generally not a common practice among stores or retail property
managers.
The Legal Accountability Of Landlords And Retailers
Case law from the Texas Supreme Court says generally premises aren't liable for
the acts of third-party violent offenders who enter their sites without
foreknowledge — essentially, if the landlord had no warning a crime might occur,
it isn't liable for the actions of the criminal.
If
a plaintiff can show the crime was foreseeable and the likelihood of injury was
high enough to outweigh the burden on the property owner or retailer to
implement strategies to stave off the threat, then the landlord could be found
liable.
But getting that verdict isn't easy.
“In Texas, you are probably going to find it is a little bit higher than
[establishing] foreseeability, especially where you have the criminal act from a
third party,” The Carson Law Firm attorney Russell Shrauner said. “You are going
to need to bring evidence to support your claim that this landlord or the owner
of this premises failed to meet their duty to the people where they were
shopping, and you would have to show that maybe there was a rash of crimes in
the parking lot or maybe there was a series of assaults or a series of thefts
that resulted in things violent happening.”
In his recently filed lawsuit for the Garcia family against Walmart, The Ammons
Law Firm attorney Patrick Luff argues the retailer knew of violence occurring at
numerous Walmart stores across the country — including a hostage situation at an
Amarillo Walmart in 2016 and a
fatal shooting at a Mississippi Walmart less than two months before the El
Paso incident — but continued to move forward with no guards or heightened
security.
“From what we have been able to find out so far, there was no discernible
security presence at the store when the shooting took place,” Luff said. “When
you look at the original petition that we filed, I include what has been
reported from the shooter that he went in and cased the place, and he didn’t see
anything that deterred him at that time.”
Luff said he believes an armed guard or a visible security team can make a life
or death difference in active shooter cases.
“We
have a number of cases where we have seen an active shooter try to pass over a
target because of the visible security presence,” Luff said. “The one that
immediately comes to mind is the Pulse nightclub shooter, who was originally
intending to go into Disney World, but saw the security presence there and
decided to go somewhere else.”
The Garcia family's suit against Walmart attempts to prove negligence and
premises liability and highlights the company's documented issues with security.
An August 2016
Bloomberg article reported more than 200 violent crimes at Walmart locations
in the first seven months of 2016, roughly one a day, and featured police
officers criticizing Walmart for its volume of incident reports, saying the
company relies too heavily on local police due to lack of on-site deterrents.
“The allegations we make in our original petition are that Walmart has a long
history of staffing security positions that are profit-based and not
customer-based,” Luff said.
The cost of hiring well-trained armed guards varies based on geographic region,
city, business location and the skills requested from the guard, according to
Aegis Security & Investigations expert Jeff Zisner. But Zisner puts hourly
armed-guard rates in the $30 to $50 range, with top-trained professionals
sometimes demanding upward of $100 per hour for certain assignments.
In a pre-litigation filing, Luff's firm asked Walmart for information on any
active shooter training programs initiated by the retailer, the number of
Walmart or Sam's Club store locations with at least one security guard on duty,
and information on all crimes that occurred at the El Paso store in the past
five years.
He also highlighted the Amarillo Walmart hostage situation in 2016 and asked the
retailer for internal communications and any documentation that may show
management or security discussions that occurred at the El Paso store or
nationally after that event.
This information could support the plaintiffs' contention that Walmart knew of
the security risks patrons and staffers face at stores nationwide and failed to
provide proper security to mitigate the risk.
“Safety is a top priority,” Walmart's Hargrove said in response to Bisnow’s
inquiry regarding the lawsuit. “We care deeply about our associates and
customers, and once we are served with the complaint, we will respond
appropriately with the court. This tragic event will be with us forever and our
hearts go out to the families that were impacted.”
Should There Be More Security?
Whether a well-trained security presence is placed at a retail center is largely
based on each store's individual history, Zisner said — is it near a bad
neighborhood or a past crime scene, or are there other factors that put it at
higher risk?
Traditionally, retail security is focused on loss prevention. The hiring of an
armed guard is normally reserved for when there is a likelihood of crime based
on facts known to the property owner or manager at the time of hiring, he said.
“Really the only reason you would have an armed guard is if you anticipate that
guard being forced to deploy their weapon to stop an attack against life.”
Zisner laid out the questions businesses may ask themselves when trying to
figure out if armed security is needed — “What’s the history of instances
happening? What are the chances of a future event happening? What’s the police
response time? Is the guard equipped and trained properly?”
There is another factor, he added.
“Is the management willing to pay a premium for someone who is armed and pay a
premium for someone who is better trained or better equipped to respond better?”
Thompson Insurance Inc. insurance broker Drew Gunn said case law on this issue
of landlords or property managers becoming liable for having no guards is still
untested, and he has been brokering active-shooter insurance policies to
retailers and businesses as protection meanwhile.
He said whether retailers believe they are liable or not in active-shooter
cases, the insurance is becoming necessary in the wake of shootings nationwide.
When a shooting occurs, lawsuits often follow, and Gunn said everybody usually
gets served from the landlord to the property manager down to the tenant.
“The case law is not extraordinarily tested. Some of these things end up
settling out of courts, so there are no punitive damages that are brought. But
that’s the reason to carry the insurance coverage because then the insurance
will pay for the legal expenses of the insured and also for any settlements,”
Gunn said.
Who should consider better security and active-shooter insurance? Gunn said a
slew of cases have made it clear who is a target.
“If you are in a large retail space with high-flow traffic, [you] ... could be a
setting for an active shooter type of event.”
But armed guards on-site is not a panacea to all of retail's problems. Bettinson
said retailers could face backlash if hired guards exert excessive force,
hurting patrons or employees and creating extra liability.
No matter how a case turns out, it really comes down to one thing, attorney Luff
said.
“I guess a larger question, putting aside the issue of legal liability, is if
you feel that you have any sort of obligation at all to your clients or your
customers, then doing nothing at all is unacceptable,” Luff said.
While this is more of a policy or societal argument, the legal argument is more
complex and harder to make stick based on cases publicized so far.
Gunn points out that one of the worst active shooter cases in the U.S. is the
young man who carried a gun into an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater, killing and
injuring dozens of trapped moviegoers in the summer of 2012.
The theater company faced a lawsuit for failing to provide adequate security,
but the judge dismissed the suit, saying a lack of security was not a
substantial factor in causing the shooting, the
Denver Post reported at the time.
Another Colorado case went in the opposite direction. A judge reportedly
overruled a ruling to dismiss an active shooter case against a Planned
Parenthood clinic in Colorado, finding that the premises had enough knowledge of
threats of potential violence to implement reasonable security measures,
Bloomberg reports.
It is in this gray area between how a premises' past shapes its future and
security expectations where Walmart falls today, according to Luff's lawsuit.
Whether the court agrees could shape how retail landlords around the country
need to handle security at their properties.
Article originally published on
bisnow.com
|