What are the common defenses raised during a negligent security lawsuit?

Negligent security cases in Texas can occur when an individual is injured on another’s property due to inadequate security measures. Common defenses raised during these lawsuits are typically rooted in the legal concept of “comparative negligence” or “contributory negligence.” In a comparative negligence case, both parties are deemed to share some responsibility for the injury. For example, if a store had a broken security camera, but the plaintiff was not paying attention to his surroundings, the store may argue that the plaintiff’s failure to be aware of his surroundings contributed to the injury. Another common defense in negligent security cases is the concept of “duty of care.” This concept of law holds that property owners have a duty to maintain a certain standard of security to protect other individuals from harm. While the amount of security required may vary from one case to another, the defense may claim that the property owner met the standard of care expected and therefore is not legally liable. Lastly, the “assumption-of-the-risk” defense may be used when a plaintiff was aware of the risks associated with the premises, but still went on the premises. Generally speaking, if the plaintiff was aware of the risks and willingly went on the property anyway, the defense may claim the plaintiff assumed the risk of injury. Negligent security cases in Texas are complex and the defenses are based on the specific facts of the case. A skilled attorney can help an individual assess the strengths and weaknesses of their case and help them decide how to proceed.

What are the common defenses raised during a negligent security lawsuit?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts