$______ RECOVERY - NEGLIGENT SECURITY AT APARTMENT BUILDING - THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT ASSAILANT INFLICTS MULTIPLE STAB WOUNDS ON DECEDENT/ MOTHER AND SURVIVING 7- MONTH OLD SON DURING ROBBERY - MOTHER DIES AT SCENE FROM STAB WOUNDS - BABY STABBED EIGHT TIMES

• Pages: 2-3

Summaries with Trial Analysis

$7,800,000 RECOVERY – NEGLIGENT SECURITY AT APARTMENT BUILDING – THIRD

PARTY DEFENDANT ASSAILANT INFLICTS MULTIPLE STAB WOUNDS ON DECEDENT/

MOTHER AND SURVIVING 7- MONTH OLD SON DURING ROBBERY – MOTHER DIES

AT SCENE FROM STAB WOUNDS – BABY STABBED EIGHT TIMES

Bergen County, NJ

The plaintiff contended that the defendant

landlord of the family’s apartment, who provided

a uniform security guard between the hours of

midnight and 8:00 am, was negligent in failing to

station a uniformed security guard 24 hours per

day. The plaintiff supported that as a result, an

assailant “tailgated” into the building by entering

the building at approximately 8:30 am when

another tenant was leaving the front door

vestibule of the building. The assailant then

stabbed a 29-year-old mother 34 times, killing

her, and stabbed the 7-month old child eight

times, causing wounds that required a two month

hospitalization, which left him with deficits that

primarily involved expressive speech delays. The

father, who was at work at the time of the attack,

found the mother and child when he returned

during lunch, and the father made a claim for

severe emotional distress under Portee vs.

Jaffee.

The defendant denied that the crime statistics in the

area were dangerous, and that posting a guard was

necessary. The plaintiff would have argued that irre-

spectiveoftheissueastowhetherthestatisticsinthe

general area reflected a sufficiently high crime rate

to mandate a 24-hour per day guard, the jury should

consider that much of the surrounding area had

been gentrified, and that the building in question re-

mained low income, and that it was likely that crimi-

nals would be that much more likely to target this

building.

The assailant was apprehended, convicted of mur-

der, and sentenced to 40 years in prison. The defen-

dants named the assailant as a third party

defendant. The assailant testified at deposition that

he was involved in a drug deal with the husband that

had gone bad, that this factor was the reason over

$14,000 was present in the apartment, and the de-

fendant landlord and management company would

have argued that in view of the assailant’s motives to

rob the family, this was a planned revenge attack,

and therefore, the presence of a uniformed guard

would not have prevented the attack from occurring.

The father denied that this position was accurate, or

that he previously knew the assailant. The father

would have testified that it was not unusual for individ-

uals in the community to have a distrust of banks,

that he shared this view, and that because of this rea-

son, he chose to keep this sum at his apartment. The

plaintiff would have also contended that the assailant

‘s suspicion that many tenants might have significant

cash on hand provided an even more compelling

reason to provide a security guard on a continual

basis.

The decedent was stabbed 34 times and suffered

wounds to her face, neck, torso, and arms. The

cause of death was the perforation of the right inter-

nal jugular vein. The plaintiff contended that although

brief, the pain and suffering attendant to dying in

such a manner was clearly horrific

The child was stabbed some eight times, and was

hospitalized for an approximate two month period.

The plaintiff maintained that the extensive blood loss

occasioned some cognitive deficits that are primarily

related to expressive speech, which are permanent

in nature. The plaintiff further supported that the signif-

icant scarring is permanent, and also argued that the

loss of the wife and mother of his child obviously had

profound consequences. The plaintiff would not have

presented expert economic testimony to discuss the

various elements attendant to the loss.

The plaintiff also made a claim for severe emotional

distress of the father, stemming from his discovery of

his wife’s body and injured son when he returned to

the apartment for lunch several hours after the at-

tack. The defendants maintained that in view of the

fact that the father did not observe the incident and

discovered that the attack occurred when he re-

turned home for lunch several hours later, there was

an insufficient basis for the claim.

The defense pretrial motions for Summary Judgment

included a motion on this issue and the Court held

that the jury could consider the claim.

The case settled prior to trial for $7,800,000.

REFERENCE

Reyes vs. Westgate, et. al. Docket no. BER-L-111-12;

Judge Charles Powers, 06-06-14.

Attorneys for plaintiff: Daryl L. Zaslow and Edward

McElroy of Eichen Crutchlow Zaslow & McElroy,LLP in

Edison, NJ.

2 SUMMARIES WITH TRIAL ANALYSIS

Volume 35, Issue 4, September 2014 Subscribe Now

Reproduction in any form without the express permission of the publisher is strictly prohibited by law.