The Legal Herald
(rrstar.com)
Negligent Security? Our Legal Take: 1 Killed, 5 Injured in Rockford Hotel Shooting
Did negligent security contribute to the death of this young man and the injury of several others? Read Our Legal Take to find out if the victims and their families may have a legal avenue for justice and claims for compensation
Local News
A shooting at the Clock Tower Resort reportedly claimed the life of 23-year-old Marcello Brown and left several others injured Saturday, October 15, 2016.
According to rrstar.com, gunfire erupted during a birthday party “at the Clock Tower Resort and Conference Center,” fatally striking Mr. Brown and injuring “five others ages 18-21.” The shooting “followed a dispute among several people,” police told media.
Rockford police and code enforcement officers apparently “conducted a security check” following the shooting. “We were concerned about the life and safety of the occupants within the hotel and the associated businesses here,” Todd Cagnoni, Director of Community and Economic Development told rrstar.com. “That was our predominant reason for being here, and from our inspections, we do have concerns.”
Our Legal Take
Hotel guests have a right to feel safe and secure on the property that they are visiting. The Murray Law Firm questions the level of security provided at the hotel and whether this tragic loss of life may have been prevented.
- What security measures, such as guest screening, ID-controlled entry, security patrols, and surveillance cameras, were in place to protect guests at the time of the shooting?
- Was the hotel aware of a party on property and, if so, what security measures were in place to oversee crowd control? Were any attempts made by hotel management or security to safely and separately remove all those involved in the initial dispute, prior to an escalation to violence?
Generally, property owners are required to protect all patrons legally on the premises from any foreseeable harm. Should the facts of this matter reveal that the hotel owner or manager failed to provide adequate security to protect those on its premises, the family of Marcello Brown may seek justice and elect to pursue a legal claim for his wrongful death. Additionally, the other victims of this shooting may elect to pursue legal claims for their injuries.
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 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 Property 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.
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.”