Criminals rarely have insurance. A Georgia negligent security claim therefore looks past the attacker to the property owner who ignored a known danger.
Below, we explain what makes an attack foreseeable, whose knowledge counts, and where the criminal’s share of fault goes.
What a Georgia Negligent Security Claim Requires
The duty starts with one statute. O.C.G.A. § 51-3-1 makes an owner liable for injuries caused by his “failure to exercise ordinary care in keeping the premises and approaches safe.”
Four elements follow from there. A claimant proves duty, breach, causation, and damages.
Owners are not guarantors, however. Georgia courts repeatedly hold that a proprietor “is not an insurer of an invitee’s safety.”
So a shooting alone proves nothing. Consequently, the fight moves immediately to what the owner should have anticipated.
Speak with a Charlotte car accident lawyer and get a free consultation today.
Call (980) 294-4931Why Foreseeability Decides These Cases
Everything turns on this one question. Without foreseeability of a criminal act, the Supreme Court has explained, “no duty on the part of the proprietor to exercise ordinary care to prevent that act arises.”
A 2023 decision reset how courts answer it. In Georgia CVS Pharmacy, LLC v. Carmichael, the Court held that “the reasonable foreseeability of a third-party criminal act is determined from the totality of the circumstances.”
That framing rejected a narrower rule. Previously, many courts demanded proof of a prior “substantially similar” crime as a threshold requirement.
Now the inquiry runs wider. According to the Court, this determination “is not susceptible to a mechanical formulation and instead must be made on a case-by-case basis.”
What Counts as Evidence of a Known Danger
Prior crime still does the heaviest lifting. The Court acknowledged that “evidence of substantially similar prior criminal activity is typically central to the inquiry.”
Four characteristics weigh that history. Prior crimes matter more when they occurred closer to the premises, closer in time, more frequently, and more similarly to the attack at issue.
None of the four is mandatory, though. Other proof reaches the same result, including gang activity on site or a volatile situation brewing that management watched develop.
One shortcut fails reliably. Calling a location a high-crime area, standing alone, does not establish a duty to guard against every conceivable crime.
Why the Owner’s Knowledge Is What Matters
Here Carmichael fixed a longstanding muddle. Earlier opinions described the duty using “superior knowledge,” which invited comparison between owner and victim.
The Court cut that short. It held “the knowledge relevant to the question of reasonable foreseeability is the proprietor’s knowledge.”
Your awareness sits elsewhere in the case. Although what you knew can affect liability, it has nothing to do with whether the owner owed a duty at all.
Who Else Can Be Liable Besides the Owner
Most properties outsource security. A management company, a staffing agency, or a contract guard firm often controls the cameras, patrols, and lighting.
Those companies face exposure directly. Carmichael confirmed that a party rendering security services “may owe a duty of care to third parties visiting the premises.”
Multiple defendants change the economics. Meanwhile each one may carry separate coverage, which matters when a single policy cannot answer a catastrophic loss.
What Happens to the Criminal’s Share of Fault
Georgia splits fault by percentage. Under § 51-12-33(b), the factfinder apportions damages “among the person or persons who are liable according to the percentage of fault of each person.”
Juries do not always blame the attacker, though. In Carmichael the jury assigned the store ninety-five percent, the victim five percent, and the shooter none — and that verdict survived review.
One threshold still ends everything. Section 51-12-33(g) says a plaintiff “shall not be entitled to receive any damages” when fifty percent or more responsible.
Defense teams therefore argue you invited the risk. Our page on personal injury defenses explains how those arguments get built.
Why Public Property Shortens Your Clock
Government defendants follow different rules. Attacks in city facilities, transit stations, and public housing all raise this problem.
Cities demand notice within six months. O.C.G.A. § 36-33-5 requires written notice of the time, place, extent of injury, and the negligence involved.
Counties allow twelve months instead. Under § 36-11-1, claims must be presented “within 12 months after they accrue or become payable.”
Missing either deadline ends a strong case. After all, no amount of prior crime evidence rescues a claim nobody filed in time.
Talk to a Georgia Negligent Security Lawyer
Shane Smith Law pulls the crime history and security records before an owner explains why nothing was foreseeable. Call (980) 246-2656 for a free consultation.
