Timothy Maust Killed, One Other Injured, in Ashland Extended Stay Motel Shooting; Security Failure?

Timothy Maust Killed, One Other Injured in Ashland Extended Stay Motel Shooting.

Timothy Maust Killed, One Other Injured in Ashland Extended Stay Motel Shooting. (AshlandSource.com)

Did negligent security contribute to this extended stay motel shooting and are justice and compensation available to the victim’s family? Read Our Legal Take below to find out what legal options are available.


A man was fatally shot and a women shot and injured at an Ashland, Ohio extended stay motel Monday night, June 10, 2019.

According to WKYC.com, “[i]t happened just before midnight at…[an] Inn on Cleveland Avenue.”  Ashland Police responded to the short-term apartment complex after three 911 callers reported hearing gunshots, according to AshlandSource.com.  Officers arrived and found a male and female victim suffering from gunshot wounds.  The male victim, identified as Timothy Maust, was pronounced dead at the scene and the female victim was transported to University Hospitals Samaritan Medical Center, according to AshlandSource.com.  WKYC.com is reporting “[f]our suspects were later identified and taken into custody.”


Motel guests and visitors have a right to feel safe and secure while on the premises. The level of security provided at the motel is of significance, and is a relevant consideration when analyzing whether this shooting may have been prevented.  The following questions are also important in assessing whether this incident may have been avoided:

  • Have there been prior incidents of violence on or near the property?
  • Was the motel aware of any improper activity before the incident occurred?
  • What security measures, such as guarded-entry, monitored surveillance cameras, bright lighting, and visible security patrols were in place to deter crime and protect the Mr. Maust and others at the time of the shooting?

Property owners are generally required to protect against foreseeable harm to anyone and everyone legally on the premises.  Should the investigation into this incident reveal facts that establish that the motel owner or management lacked adequate security to protect its guests and visitors, Timothy Maust’s family may seek justice and elect to pursue legal claims and substantial compensation for their loss.  In addition, any other injured victim may seek justice and elect to pursue legal claims and substantial compensation for their injuries.

The Murray Law Firm has extensive and successful experience in handling security negligence claims on behalf of victims and their families, and suggests that an immediate, unbiased inspection of the property will need to be performed so as to limit evidence from being altered, damaged or destroyed.  The complexities of pursuing a negligent security case are well understood by the legal team at The Murray Law Firm, and it is imperative that Mr. Maust’s  family and any other victims retain a capable law firm who will work without delay to protect their interests.


The Murray Law Firm has a long history of representing victims of violence and security negligence.  We have obtained over $100 Million in verdicts and settlements for our Clients, including 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 (Click Here)

DISCLAIMERS:  The information contained in this post is from secondary sources and may therefore contain inaccuracies. We will gladly correct or remove this post upon request.  The material contained in this post is not intended to constitute legal advice. As each Client is unique, please contact us for a free consultation on your particular case.  “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.