Apartment held liable for man’s fatal shooting

Jurors decided that the owners of a St. Louis apartment complex are liable for more than $3 million after their failure to secure an external door allowed a fatal shooting to occur. 

“Our claim in the case was that they had had problems in the past with crime on the premises and that they should have known that the external locks to their doors were not always secured,” said Kevin Carnie Jr. of The Simon Law Firm. “They were sometimes broken. They were sometimes bypassed from people putting things in the locks.” 

The firm represented Jose and Celsa Garcia, whose 26-year-old son Jose Jr. was shot and killed by Adnan Husidic in 2016. Husidic came to Garcia’s girlfriend’s residence at Park Val Apartments to return some laundry. According to media reports, Garcia had made death threats against the shooter in online conversations. 

Husidic was charged in the death but claimed self-defense and ultimately was acquitted. The results of the criminal trial were not admissible in the civil matter. 

The civil suit targeted the apartment complex itself, as the shooter gained access through a door that was supposed to require an electronic fob. Carnie said there was some dispute over how Husidic gained access to the unit itself. 

C. Zachary Vaughn of Wiedner & McAuliffe, an attorney for the defense, said all parties acknowledged that the door was unsecured, although it was unclear why. Vaughn said that he offered a “multilayered” defense centered on the contention that his clients were not responsible for the behavior of the participants or the resulting violence. 

“Under Missouri law, you have to satisfy one of a certain number of exceptions to the common law rule, which is that there is no duty to protect against third-party criminal acts,” he said. 

Vaughn argued there was not enough violent crime in the area to merit such an exception. 

Though jurors ruled for the plaintiff, they found the decedent 70 percent responsible in the incident, reducing the $100,000 in damages to $30,000. Jurors also issued a $3 million punitive award that was unaffected by the allocation of fault. 

“I think the jury sent a pretty clear message with their punitive damage award saying that they didn’t like the way that this place was managed and they thought that the apartment complex should have done more,” Carnie said.  

Vaughn said that one juror indicated afterwards that his clients’ large revenue figures presented in the second phase of the bifurcated trial probably increased the punitive award.  

“I think the jury wasn’t too inclined to award big numbers in this case but then they heard some big numbers,” he said. 

Vaughn said his clients deny any negligence in the matter and an appeal is probable. 

“We disagree with the jury’s findings and we disagree with a number of the court’s rulings,” he said. 

RELATED: Click to search for and submit your Verdicts & Settlements