Our firm is about people. That is our motto and that will always be our reality.
We do our best to get to know our clients, understand their situations, and get them the compensation they deserve.
At TorHoerman Law, we believe that if we continue to focus on the people that we represent, and continue to be true to the people that we are – justice will always be served.
Without our team, we would’nt be able to provide our clients with anything close to the level of service they receive when they work with us.
The TorHoerman Law Team commits to the sincere belief that those injured by the misconduct of others, especially large corporate profit mongers, deserve justice for their injuries.
Our team is what has made TorHoerman Law a very special place since 2009.
Attorney Tor Hoerman, admitted to the Illinois State Bar Association since 1995 and The Missouri Bar since 2009, specializes nationally in mass tort litigations. Locally, Tor specializes in auto accidents and a wide variety of personal injury incidents occuring in Illinois and Missouri.
This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy and clarity by the team of writers and attorneys at TorHoerman Law and is as accurate as possible. This content should not be taken as legal advice from an attorney. If you would like to learn more about our owner and experienced injury lawyer, Tor Hoerman, you can do so here.
TorHoerman Law does everything possible to make sure the information in this article is up to date and accurate. If you need specific legal advice about your case, contact us. This article should not be taken as advice from an attorney.
Negligent security lawsuits allow injured people pursue compensation after assaults, shootings, robberies, sexual violence, and other violent crimes that occur on property where basic safety measures were missing, broken, or ignored.
Many of these cases involve preventable attacks at apartment complexes, hotels, parking garages, bars, convenience stores, and other high-traffic locations where owners failed to address foreseeable risks with reasonable security precautions, such as adequate lighting, controlled access, working cameras, or trained security personnel.
TorHoerman Law reviews negligent security claims for individuals harmed in these incidents and represents families pursuing wrongful death claims after an overwhelming, avoidable loss.
Negligent security lawsuits are designed to hold property owners accountable when preventable safety failures contribute to an assault, robbery, shooting, or other violent incident.
In a negligent security lawsuit, the legal process typically starts with a rapid investigation because key evidence, like surveillance footage, incident logs, and maintenance records, can disappear quickly.
Our lawyers begin by identifying the security gaps that may have played a role, such as broken locks, poor lighting, missing access control, or non-functioning cameras.
Next, we focus on foreseeability by examining whether there were prior incidents, repeated complaints, or known crime patterns that made the danger predictable.
In many negligent security cases, proving the timeline matters, so we gather police reports, witness statements, medical records, and any documentation showing what the property knew and what it failed to fix.
We also review policies and staffing records to determine whether the property’s security plan existed on paper but failed in practice.
Once the evidence is preserved, the case moves into the claim phase, where we present the facts and damages and push back against attempts to minimize the security failures or shift blame to the victim.
If the defense refuses to take responsibility, negligent security lawsuits often proceed into formal litigation, including discovery, depositions, expert review, and motion practice.
Throughout the process, we document the full impact of the harm (medical costs, lost income, and the long-term physical and emotional effects) so the claim reflects what the incident actually changed.
If you were harmed and believe negligent security contributed to what happened, contact our team to discuss your options and learn what it takes to pursue a negligent security lawsuit.
You can also use the chatbot on this page to see if you qualify immediately.
A negligent security case arises when someone is harmed by foreseeable criminal acts on else’s property and the evidence shows a property owner’s failure to take reasonable steps to reduce that risk.
Under premises liability and premises liability law, the legal process usually starts with an investigation into duty of care, whether the property owner was required to implement reasonable safety measures, and whether inadequate security measures played a meaningful role in the attack.
A negligent security attorney will typically move fast to preserve time-sensitive evidence like security cameras footage, incident reports, and maintenance records, because those details often decide whether you can build a successful negligent security claim.
From there, negligent security litigation often focuses on proving foreseeability (prior incidents, complaints, crime patterns), showing what reasonable steps should have been taken (lighting, access control, adequate security personnel, trained security personnel), and documenting damages such as medical expenses and medical bills lost wages.
Many cases progress through an insurance claim phase and then formal filing, discovery, and depositions, where the defense may argue the attack was unpredictable or that security companies, not the property owner, controlled the safety plan.
A successful negligent security lawsuit often comes down to connecting three things clearly: the known risk, the security gap, and how that gap made the harm more likely or more severe so the right parties can be held and property owners accountable.

Steps in the negligent security claim process include:
After an assault, your first priority is safety and medical care, and the next priority is preserving evidence before it disappears.
Call 911 or contact local law enforcement as soon as you can, and request an official report that documents what happened and where.
Get medical treatment promptly, even if symptoms feel delayed, because medical expenses, medical bills, and lost wages often become key parts of the claim and early documentation matters.
If it’s safe, take photos or video of the scene, especially broken locks, blind spots, non-functioning security cameras, missing signage, or other inadequate security measures.

Ask for witness names and contact information, and write down what you remember while it’s still fresh, including whether the location (like an apartment complex) had prior issues or repeated complaints.
Avoid giving recorded statements to insurers or the property before speaking with a negligent security attorney, because early statements are often used to minimize responsibility or shift blame.
If you’re trying to seek compensation, acting quickly helps preserve proof of the property owner’s failure and strengthens the foundation of a successful negligent security claim.
Different types of negligent security usually involve the same core issue: the property did not take reasonable steps to protect visitors from foreseeable criminal acts, even though the duty of care required it.

Common examples include:
Other cases involve access-control failures (broken gates, unsecured doors), inadequate lighting, or policies that allowed dangerous conditions to persist, especially at an apartment complex, parking areas, hotels, or late-night businesses where crime risk is higher.
Some negligent security cases also involve security companies, either because a contractor failed to perform required duties or because the property relied on “paper security” that looked good on a contract but didn’t translate into real protection.
In premises liability claims, the type of failure matters because it shapes what evidence you need (camera logs, guard schedules, training records, prior incident history) and how you prove that the property owner’s failure contributed to the harm.
When those pieces line up, the case can support negligent security litigation aimed at holding the responsible parties accountable and helping the victim seek compensation for medical expenses and lost wages.
Negligent security is a type of premises-liability claim that arises when property owners fail to provide adequate security and someone is harmed by a foreseeable criminal act on the property.
In plain terms, negligent security means the danger was predictable, reasonable safety measures were missing, and a person was injured due to negligent security.

A negligent security claim focuses on whether the property had a duty to provide adequate security measures, like functional security measures, trained security personnel, and basic deterrents, and whether inadequate security contributed to the harm.
When the evidence supports it, negligent security lawsuits seek accountability and compensation for the losses that follow, including medical bills and other damages tied to the incident.
Negligent security incidents often involve concrete, fixable failures that made an attack easier to carry out or harder to prevent.
In many negligent security cases, the issue isn’t that crime happened.
It’s that the property did not provide reasonable security measures that matched the risk.
Examples include understaffed or absent security personnel, missing surveillance, and conditions that leave visitors exposed because the site did not provide adequate security or provide adequate security measures for known risks.

A negligent security case may also involve “paper compliance,” where property owners claim they have adequate security, but the security measures are not working, not monitored, or not enforced when it matters.
These breakdowns can leave people dealing with serious harm and mounting medical bills due to negligent security, especially when the incident causes lasting physical or emotional injuries.
Foreseeability is often the central fight in negligent security lawsuits because it determines whether property owners should have anticipated the risk and taken stronger steps to prevent it.
The question is whether the criminal act was reasonably predictable based on the property’s history, repeated complaints, nearby crime patterns, or prior negligent security incidents at the same location.
If the risk was foreseeable, the law often expects the property to provide reasonable security measures and reasonable safety measures: steps that are realistic for the setting and designed to reduce the likelihood or severity of harm.

A negligent security lawyer typically proves foreseeability by collecting incident reports, calls for service, internal complaints, and records showing whether the property did (or did not) provide adequate security.
When the facts show the danger was predictable and the site failed to provide adequate security measures, the argument is that the victim was harmed due to negligent security, not random bad luck.
Negligent security refers to a premises liability claim where an injured person can show negligent security occurs because a property owner had a legal duty and legal obligation to protect visitors from foreseeable harm, but inadequate safety measures allowed a violent crime or other criminal activity to happen.
Many negligent security cases turn on whether property owners fail to address known risks, like broken locks, poor access control, or the absence of adequate lighting in parking lots, parking garages, stairwells, or entryways, despite warning signs that individuals suffer harm there.
If the danger was predictable and the property did not maintain safe premises or protect visitors with reasonable security steps, the case may support holding property owners accountable for preventable harm.

These claims can apply in places like shopping centers, apartment properties, bars, hotels, or other public-facing locations where crime risk is higher and safety gaps are easier to document.
Deadlines matter, so the statute of limitations can become a deciding factor even when the evidence is strong and the injuries are severe.
Negligent security cases are proof-driven, and evidence is often time-sensitive because surveillance systems overwrite footage and properties may “fix” problems immediately after an incident.
Start with police reports and any incident documentation, then gather photos or video of the conditions that mattered: broken locks, missing adequate lighting, blocked sightlines, non-working cameras, or absent security guards.
A strong case also relies on showing foreseeability, which can involve prior complaints, prior incidents, calls for service, and records showing the property knew about repeated criminal activity.

Your legal team may also work with security experts or security experts reviews to explain what safety steps were reasonable for that location and why the failure increased risk.
Keep medical records, wage documentation, and any communications with the property or insurers, because the timeline and documentation help connect the security lapse to the injuries and losses.
Damages are meant to measure what the incident has cost the injured person financially, physically, and emotionally.
Financial recovery may include medical expenses, lost income, reduced earning capacity, and other out-of-pocket losses tied to personal injury treatment and recovery.

Many claims also include:
When the harm is fatal, families may pursue wrongful death damages based on the losses caused by the death and the impact on surviving loved ones.
The goal is financial compensation that reflects the real-world consequences of the attack, not just the immediate bills, and a case that supports fair financial recovery requires careful documentation from the start.
Liability usually follows control: the party that controlled the property and the security decisions is often the one the law uses for holding property owners accountable when property owners fail to maintain safe premises.
Depending on the facts, that may include the property owner, landlord, management company, or business operator for failing to protect visitors against foreseeable harm.
In some cases, security contractors may also be involved if security guards were hired but not properly trained, staffed, supervised, or deployed, especially when contract promises didn’t match what actually happened.

These cases are fact-specific, but the legal question stays consistent: who had the legal duty to implement reasonable security measures, and whose failures created or worsened the risk that individuals suffer harm.
When a claim is supported, the lawsuit’s purpose is straightforward: it holds property owners responsible and holds property owners accountable when preventable criminal activity causes injury.
TorHoerman Law is a law firm that guides clients through the process of negligent security claims with a focus on fast evidence preservation and clear liability proof.
We investigate why negligent security occurs at a specific location, what inadequate safety measures were missing, and whether adequate lighting, access control, surveillance systems, or security guards should have been in place to protect visitors.
Our team gathers police reports, witness information, and property records, and we work with security experts when needed to explain how the security failures increased the risk of foreseeable harm.
We also build the damages picture from day one (medical proof, lost income, and the full impact of emotional distress and pain and suffering) so the claim reflects what the incident truly changed.

If you were harmed at shopping centers, parking garages, parking lots, or another property where safety broke down, contact TorHoerman Law to discuss your legal options and protect your right to financial compensation before the statute of limitations becomes a barrier.
You can also use the chatbot on this page to see if you qualify immediately.
The legal process for negligent security lawsuits usually starts with an immediate investigation because evidence can disappear fast, especially surveillance footage, access logs, and maintenance records.
Your lawyer typically gathers police reports, witness statements, medical records, and property documents to show what happened and what security failures contributed to it.
If the claim is not resolved through an early settlement, the case may move into litigation, including discovery, depositions, expert review, and motion practice.
The deadline is controlled by the statute of limitations, and missing it can end the case even if the facts are strong.
Because the correct filing window can depend on the state, the date of injury, and who the defendants are, it’s important to confirm the deadline as early as possible.
Acting quickly also protects your claim because properties may repair hazards, and surveillance systems may overwrite footage within days or weeks.
The most important evidence often includes security camera footage, incident reports, maintenance and inspection records, and documentation of prior incidents or complaints showing the risk was foreseeable.
Medical records and photographs of the scene, like broken locks, poor lighting, or missing access control, can help connect the security failure to the injuries.
A lawyer may also work with security experts to explain what reasonable safety measures should have been in place for that location.
Liability usually falls on the party that controlled the property and made the safety decisions, such as the property owner, landlord, management company, or business operator.
In some cases, a third-party security contractor may also be involved if guards were poorly trained, understaffed, or not deployed as required.
The key question is who had the duty to protect visitors and whose failures made the attack more likely or more severe.
Compensation may include medical expenses, lost income, and future care costs, along with damages for pain and suffering and the long-term effects of emotional trauma.
If the incident causes lasting psychological harm, the claim may include recovery for emotional distress and treatment needs related to trauma symptoms.
In fatal cases, families may also have wrongful death claims tied to the losses caused by the death and the impact on surviving loved ones.
Owner & Attorney - TorHoerman Law
Here, at TorHoerman Law, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Since 2009, we have successfully collected over $4 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TorHoerman Law, we believe that if we continue to focus on the people that we represent, and continue to be true to the people that we are – justice will always be served.
Do you believe you’re entitled to compensation?
Use our Instant Case Evaluator to find out in as little as 60 seconds!
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $20 Million for our client after they suffered a Toxic Tort Injury due to chemical exposure.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $103.8 Million for our client after they suffered a COX-2 Inhibitors Injury.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $4 Million for our client after they suffered a Traumatic Brain Injury while at daycare.
In this case, we were able to successfully recover $2.8 Million for our client after they suffered an injury due to a Defective Heart Device.
Here, at TorHoerman Law, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Since 2009, we have successfully collected over $4 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
Average Negligent Security Settlements
What Types of Cases Does a Negligent Security Attorney Handle?
What is Negligent Security?
Negligent Security Lawsuit Guide