Security Negligence? Charles Brown III Injured in Martin, TN Apartment Complex Shooting.

Charles Brown III Injured in Martin, TN Apartment Complex Shooting.

Charles Brown III Injured in Martin, TN Apartment Complex Shooting. (Stock Photo: MurrayLegal.com)

Did negligent security contribute to the shooting at a Martin apartment complex and are justice and compensation available to the victim?  Read Our Legal Take below to find out what legal options are available.

LOCAL NEWS

A man was shot at a Martin, Tennessee apartment complex early Saturday morning, November 9, 2019.  

As reported by JacksonSun.com, “Martin police responded to a shooting call at…Apartments on West Peach Street at around 12:55 a.m.”

According to the report, two individuals “were with 23-year-old Charles Brown III at the apartment complex when multiple individuals approached them in an attempt to rob them at gunpoint.”

At some point during the attempted robbery, “[Charles] Brown was shot.”

The victim was taken to “Tennessee Healthcare in Martin and was later flown to Vanderbilt Hospital, where he was ultimately released,” according to the media report.

The investigation is ongoing.

OUR LEGAL TAKE

Residents and guests of apartment complexes have a right to feel safe and secure while on the premises. The level of security provided at the apartment complex is of significance, and is a relevant consideration when analyzing whether this shooting may have been prevented.  The following questions are also important in assessing whether this incident may have been avoided:

  • What security measures were in place to deter crime and protect the victim at the time of the shooting?
  • Have there been prior incidents of violence on the property, and were any security measures added after any prior incidents?
  • Was the complex aware of any suspicious persons or suspicious activity on the property prior to the shootings? 

Property owners are generally required to protect against foreseeable harm to anyone and everyone legally on the premises.  Should the investigation into this incident reveal facts that establish that the apartment complex owner or management lacked adequate security to protect its residents and visitors, Charles Brown III may seek justice and elect to pursue legal claims and substantial compensation for his injuries. 

The Murray Law Firm has extensive and successful experience in handling security negligence claims on behalf of victims and their families, and suggests that an immediate, unbiased inspection of the property will need to be performed so as to limit evidence from being altered, damaged or destroyed.  The complexities of pursuing a negligent security case are well understood by the legal team at The Murray Law Firm, and it is imperative that Charles Brown III retain a capable law firm who will work without delay to protect his interests.

OUR RESULTS: OVER $100 MILLION IN VERDICTS AND SETTLEMENTS FOR OUR CLIENTS

The Murray Law Firm has a long history of representing victims of violence and security negligence.  We have obtained over $100 Million in verdicts and settlements for our Clients, including 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.

728x90 Justice

Choosing the Right Attorney (Click Here)

DISCLAIMERS:  The information contained in this post is from secondary sources and may therefore contain inaccuracies. We will gladly correct or remove this post upon request.  The material contained in this post is not intended to constitute legal advice. As each Client is unique, please contact us for a free consultation on your particular case.  “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.