Bar & Nightclub Negligent Security Attorney in Atlanta

It is true that in most Atlanta nightclub injuries involving an act of violence, law enforcement is likely going to get involved. However, even if they pursue criminal charges against the assailant/aggressor, that does not help to compensate victims for their medical expenses, lost wages, and physical pain and suffering.

That is why there is a civil process entirely separate from the criminal matter. Some differences between civil and criminal cases:

• Criminal cases are initiated and managed by law enforcement and prosecutors. Civil cases are initiated by plaintiffs (the person injured), who have power and discretion in deciding which claims to pursue against whom and when/if to settle.
• Criminal cases must be resolved either through a plea deal or when a judge/jury finds a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt – the highest proof standard. Civil cases can be resolved via settlement or at trial, if the plaintiff can prove their position by a preponderance of the evidence, a lower proof burden.
• Criminal cases, because of the high proof burden and inherent complexities, do not always succeed. Sometimes, the assailant is never caught. That does not mean a civil case cannot succeed because it is an entirely separate process.
• Criminal cases are pursued against defendants who have broken state or federal penal codes. Civil injury and wrongful death cases are pursued against those who have violated their duties of care toward certain parties. A civil case for intentional tort can be pursued directly against an attacker. However, insurance won’t cover damages for intentional torts, and those who commit violence in nightclubs don’t have many personal assets that could satisfy a civil judgment. However, insurers usually will cover damages for third-party liability claims, such as negligent security on behalf of the nightclub.

By consulting with a civil trial lawyer in Atlanta as soon as possible after your injury, you ensure all possible avenues of compensation are explored.

To ensure the safety of patrons and guests, nightclubs have a duty of care to provide adequate security. The definition of what constitutes “adequate” security varies from case-to-case and location-to-location. Again, the courts will look at whether the attack was reasonably foreseeable given the history of violence at the club and in the neighborhood.

Generally, nightclubs can provide safety for patrons and guests by taking some of the following measures:

• Security guards, inside and outside.
• Metal detectors.
• Adequate lighting.
• Security cameras.

If a nightclub fails to provide adequate security given the pattern of previous violence, you may be entitled to recoup financial damages.

The well-known history of violence at downtown Atlanta bars & nightclubs in recent years is also notable for a key civil litigation purpose: Foreseeability.

Third-party property owners or controllers can be held liable for acts of violence at their venue – even if they had nothing to do with it – if such incidents were reasonably foreseeable AND the owners failed to take prudent, preventative action. But how do we establish the foreseeability of a crime?

As an Atlanta Negligent Security Lawyer can explain, this is typically done by showing a pattern of similar acts of violence on site or in the vicinity. Past acts of violence make future acts of violence reasonably predictable and can form the basis of a strong negligent security claim.

Bar and nightclub owners in Atlanta are – or should be – well aware of the risk of violence at their establishments, particularly in the downtown region. City leaders have even proposed legislation that would require liquor license holders who own adjacent parking lots to extend security into those areas too.

While formalizing such action in local ordinance is certainly a welcome move, it should be noted that such responsibility has already been recognized by Georgia courts. The 2017 Georgia Supreme Court ruling in Martin v. Six Flags involved a patron who was injured across the street from the park in a violent incident that began with gangs inside the park. The court held the park liable for the man’s injuries.

As previously mentioned in the Martin case, there is legal precedent in Georgia for property owners to be held liable for injuries and acts of violence that occur in adjacent areas, including parking lots.

Specific to nightclubs, the Georgia Court of Appeals ruled in the 1991 case of Confetti Atlanta v. Gray that a nightclub could be liable for inadequate security after a patron was injured by another patron who was intoxicated and ran him over with a truck in the parking lot. The court ruled this was not an unforeseeable, isolated criminal act, but an uninterrupted fight that started in the nightclub, which lacked adequate security. Evidence of prior fights that had occurred both inside and outside the club made future fights foreseeable. Plus, it’s foreseeable that any fight that continues without interruption can escalate to become more violent.

Bottom line: Grounds for inadequate security premises liability claims stemming from incidents outside the actual walls of the club are well-established.

If you’re injured in an Atlanta nightclub, our experienced Georgia injury lawyers will help you formulate the smartest legal strategy given the circumstances of your case.

Georgia’s statute of limitations (GA Code § 9-3-33) dictates that injured parties in Georgia have just two years from the bar/nightclub  incident that caused injury to bring forward their personal injury claims. Once those two years are up, a court will dismiss the claim. It is important to remember that oftentimes, insurance companies will engage in stalling techniques to run out the clock and avoid paying you anything. Contacting an experienced and dedicated personal injury attorney to evaluate your case and advocate on your behalf is the best chance at receiving the compensation that victims deserve.