Miami Attorneys Score $1.4 Million Verdict Over Flea Market Stabbings
The case lasted nearly four years before a court found the defendant responsible for the dangerous environment that led to the stabbings.
April 06, 2020 at 02:52 PM
6 minute read
As three men were walking through a flea market parking lot late in the evening, attackers brutally stabbed them. Now, a jury has awarded the three men hefty damages for the injuries they sustained, due to the failure of the flea market to maintain a safe environment.
Attorneys Daniel W. Courtney and Roy J. Kahn won a $1.4 million verdict on behalf of their clients, Lazaro Rodriguez, Eusebio Perez and Leuvis Leyva, in the Miami-Dade Circuit Court.
The plaintiffs recovered $562,404, after the jury assigned 40 percent of the blame to the flea market, and the remainder of the blame to the plaintiffs and a market vendor. which represented 40 percent of the gross amount.
The case lasted nearly four years before a court found the defendant, GFM Operations, responsible for the dangerous environment that led to the stabbings.
GFM was the sole owner and operator of the Opa Locka Hialeah Flea Market, where it leased space to more than 800 vendors.
At trial, the jury found GFM negligent and determined that this negligence was a legal cause of the injuries the three men sustained.
"This flea market is rampant with crime," Courtney said. "During jury selection, there were people who talked about their experience when they were little at the flea market. And they remember feeling fearful in terms of the lack of security."
The lead attorney listed for GFM, Michael Pedowitz from Baumann, Gant & Keeley, did not respond to requests for comment.
In a post-verdict pleading, the lawyers for the plaintiffs say the men are entitled to 100% of the damages determined by the jury because Florida Statutes Section 768.81, Florida's comparative fault statute, does not apply to actions based upon an intentional tort. Here, the criminals in the case intentionally stabbed the three victims.
The court listed a vendor as a Fabre defendant, which was assigned 25% liability. Jurors also assigned partial liability to the stabbing victims. The jury assigned 40% of the blame to the flea market, reducing the plaintiffs recovery to $562,404.
A special set hearing for an hour April 3 has been canceled due to court closures because of the coronavirus outbreak. There has not been a rescheduling of the hearing.
Part of the reason GFM was liable for these amounts is that its agreement with its landlord stipulates that GFM had to maintain the upkeep of the premises, such as performing repairs, ordinary maintenance, or "to warn of any unsafe conditions," court filings show.
An Opa-locka ordinance in place several years before the attack requires all flea markets to operate and manage the flea market to maintain safety, while preventing hooliganism, assaults and battery upon visitors, and to have "a sufficient number of guards on the premises for such purposes."
According to the judgment, during discovery in the case, a document says GM swore under oath that it only had the responsibility for the security in the area where the attacks and stabbings took place.
Rodriguez, Perez and Leyva were playing dominoes at the flea market all through the afternoon, outside of Los Ranchos restaurant. In the evening, an unfamiliar group of men got into an argument with Perez at the restaurant. According to Courtney, his clients were not looking to fight. The group of men left the dominoes players and walked toward the parking lot.
"Our client went there a few minutes afterward and essentially got jumped," Courtney said. "In a negligent security case, you would very often see, lighting is insufficient. That is almost an invitation for criminal activity."
Around 10 p.m., when the three men were attacked in the "common area parking lot controlled by GFM," the plaintiffs lawyers argued it was foreseeable. There was repeatedly a lack of security guards, and during the incident, no guards were standing watch. Poor lighting has not been remedied, and the victims could not see the faces of their attackers and that they were carrying weapons at the time of the assault.
Plaintiffs alleged high crime at the flea market. In the last three years, there have been over 800 calls to the police — 40 of those calls were for battery and 10 for robberies, according to information in the final judgment. And a person at the flea market was killed three weeks before the attack.
While each man was stabbed, Leyva was wounded in his back. Having never seen the face of the person who stabbed him, Courtney said Leyva was in fear for his life.
"He was so concerned that the person would come back and try to kill him, he ended up moving to the middle of nowhere," Courtney said. "He moved to Madison, Nebraska, which is a town of about 2,000 people."
Perez primarily speaks Spanish, yet few people in Madison do. He moved away from his three siblings and nephews.
"So, it was interesting because the insufficient lighting not only plays into the liability of GFM Operations," Courtney said, "but it also plays into the damages of our client."
Perez had the most severe injuries from the brutal attack. Courtney said the stab wound penetrated his diaphragm and his lung, inches away from his heart. However, Perez took actions afterward that did not help his case.
"In terms of obstacles in the case, he ended up going back to Los Ranchos and continued to drink there regularly," Courtney said. As a result of that conduct, Courtney noted, "He ended up with the lowest jury verdict."
Case: Rodriguez v. GFM Operations Inc.,
Case no.: 2016-021307-CA-01
Filing date: Aug. 16, 2016
Verdict date: Feb. 19, 2020
Plaintiffs attorneys: Daniel W. Courtney, Law Office of Daniel W. Courtney, Miami; and Roy J. Kahn, Roy J. Kahn P.A., Miami
Defense attorneys: Gary F. Baumann, Baumann, Gant & Keeley, Fort Lauderdale; and Michael J. Pedowitz, Baumann, Gant & Keeley, Fort Lauderdale
Verdict amount: $1.4 million
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSlew of Litigation Hurdles Ahead in Case of Alleged Pro Sports Sexual Harassment
$2.3M in Legal Fees Sought After Long South Florida Feud Over $127K
Trending Stories
- 1Holland & Knight Launches Export Control Disputes and Advocacy Team
- 2Blake Lively's claims that movie co-star launched smear campaign gets support in publicist's suit
- 3Middle District of Pennsylvania's U.S. Attorney Announces Resignation
- 4Vinson & Elkins: Traditional Energy Practice Meets Energy Transition
- 5After 2024's Regulatory Tsunami, Financial Services Firms Hope Storm Clouds Break
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250