Fatal Security Lapse? Marquian Hearring Killed, Bystander Injured in Las Vegas Apartment Shooting

Could this Las Vegas apartment shooting have been prevented?

Local News

Gunfire reportedly broke out following an altercation at a Las Vegas apartment complex, July 4, 2017, claiming the life of 30-year-old Marquian Hearring and leaving an innocent bystander injured.

According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, the shooting occurred “at an apartment complex at 4300 N. Lamont Street near Nellis Boulevard and Craig Road.” The Las Vegas Sun reports, a dispute between the Mr. Hearring and an apartment resident escalated into gunfire. Mr. Hearring succumbed to fatal injuries. An innocent bystander was apparently struck and injured during the hail of gunfire. That victim’s condition and identity have not been released.

Did negligent security contribute to this senseless shooting? We represent individuals and families who have suffered a tragic loss or injury as a consequence of negligent property security. Read Our Legal Take below to find out if the victims and their families may have a legal avenue for justice and claims for substantial compensation in Nevada, or call now for a free consultation with our legal team: 888.842.1616.

Our Legal Take

Apartment residents and guests have a right to feel safe and secure while on the premises. The Murray Law Firm questions the level of security provided on the property and whether this unconscionable shooting may have been prevented.

  • Where was apartment security and management during the initial dispute? Were any efforts made by the apartment complex to call police prior to an escalation to violence?
  • What security measures, such as tenant and guest screenings, surveillance cameras, and security patrols, were in place to deter crime and protect residents at the time of the shooting?

Generally, property owners are required to protect all residents and guests legally on the premises from any foreseeable harm. Should the facts of this matter reveal that the apartment complex owner or management company failed to provide adequate security to protect those on its premises, the family of Marquian Hearring may seek justice and elect to pursue legal claims for his wrongful death. Additionally, the other victim of this unconscionable shooting may pursue legal claims for injuries.

Based upon its prior successful experience in handling security negligence claims on behalf of victims and their families, The Murray Law Firm suggests that photographs and a thorough, unbiased inspection of the property will need to be performed immediately, before any evidence may be repaired, damaged or destroyed. Given the complexities of pursuing a negligent security case, it is imperative that the victims retain an experienced attorney who can ensure the preservation of any and all evidence that may support such a claim.

We’ve Recovered Millions for Victims of Apartment Security Negligence…Contact us Now for a Free Consultation.

Headline Frame Fox News DeskThe Murray Law Firm has an extensive and successful record representing victims of violence and security negligence. We have recovered millions of dollars for our Clients, and recently obtained a $29.25 million dollar verdict for a victim of an unsafe property. We offer our legal assistance, if desired.

We represent our Clients on a contingency agreement, which generally means that no fees or payments are owed until and unless we recover.  Anyone seeking further information or legal representation is encouraged to contact us via e-mail (click here) or by telephone at 888.842.1616. Consultations are free and confidential.

728x90 Justice


Choosing the Right Attorney

Selecting the right attorney for you or your family is highly important. You must feel confident that the attorney you hire has a complete understanding of the law applicable to your particular case, and has successful experience in handling such cases.

Important: Do not hire a lawyer who has violated the Rules of Professional Conduct!!!

You should not hire an attorney who calls you or visits you unsolicited, or anyone that contacts you directly to offer legal services. This activity is strictly prohibited by Rule 7.3 of the American Bar Association (ABA) Model Rules of Professional Conduct, which states as follows:

ABA Center for Professional ResponsibilityA LAWYER “SHALL NOT” CONTACT A PROSPECTIVE CLIENT THROUGH A “LIVE TELEPHONE” OR AN “IN-PERSON” VISIT.

– RULE 7.3, ABA MODEL RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.

If an attorney, or someone acting on behalf of an attorney, contacts you in this manner, that attorney is in violation of this Rule. This unethical and unprofessional activity on the part of the lawyer is good sign that you should stay away. It is imperative that you are represented by an attorney who is capable of advocating for you within the confines of the law, and an attorney who fails to abide by the Rules of Professional Conduct is probably not the best fit. In fact, any such attorney should be immediately reported to the local State Bar Association. If you have been contacted in such an unsolicited manner, contact us and we’ll assist you in filing a report.

Contingency Fees Disclaimer: “Contingent attorneys’ fees refers only to those fees charged by attorneys for their legal services. Such fees are not permitted in all types of cases. Court costs and other additional expenses of legal action usually must be paid by the client.