The Legal Herald
Could the tragic loss of this brave Cumberland man have been prevented and are justice and compensation available to Mr. Raley’s family?
Local News
Security measures are in question after 37-year-old Gregory Raley was shot and killed “at a Cumberland Dollar General store Monday evening,” December 10, 2018, according to The Indy Channel. Mr. Raley was heroically “trying to protect his girlfriend after witnessing an armed robbery inside the store.” Tragically, he succumbed to fatal injuries at the scene.
Cumberland police told WTHR 13, “the crime was the third robbery of a dollar store in the Indianapolis area Monday. The store where the shooting occurred is located next to a Pizza King restaurant that was robbed last Friday night.” The incidents raise grave questions over security measures on property.
Did negligent security contribute to this fatal Cumberland Dollar General 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 Mr. Raley’s family may have a legal avenue for justice and claims for substantial compensation in Indiana, or call now for a free consultation with our legal team: 888.842.1616.
Our Legal Take
Store 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.
- What additional security measures, such as bright parking lot lighting, metal detectors, monitored surveillance cameras, and visible security personnel, were implemented by the store and parking lot owners following police reports of several dollar store robberies in the area?
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 store or parking lot owners failed to provide adequate security to protect those on its premises, Mr. Raley’s family may seek justice and elect to pursue legal claims for their loss.
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 victim’s family 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 Store and Parking Lot 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:
A LAWYER “SHALL NOT” CONTACT A PROSPECTIVE CLIENT THROUGH A “LIVE TELEPHONE” OR AN “IN-PERSON” VISIT.
– 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.