Preventable Tragedy? Tommy Micah Lavette Killed in Cleveland Gas Station Shooting.

Tommy Micah Lavette Killed in Cleveland Gas Station Shooting.

Tommy Micah Lavette Killed in Cleveland Gas Station Shooting. (News5Cleveland.com)

Did negligent security contribute to this shooting death of Tommy Micah Lavette and are justice and compensation available to the victim’s family? Read Our Legal Take below to find out what legal options are available.

CLEVELAND NEWS

Gunfire erupted Tuesday night, August 20, 2019 at a Cleveland, Ohio gas station leaving one young man dead.

According to Cleveland19.com, “[t]he incident occurred at [a gas] station near the intersection of Lee Road and Harvard Avenue around 11:15 p.m.”

When officers arrived they found a victim suffering multiple gunshot wounds.

The victim was transported to University Hospital where he later succumbed to his injuries.

News5Cleveland.com is reporting the victim “has been identified as Tommy Micah Lavette.”

The suspect fled the scene, the investigation is ongoing.

OUR LEGAL TAKE

Gas Station and convenience store patrons have a right to feel safe and secure while on the premises they are visiting. The level of security provided at the property 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?
  • What security measures, such as bright lighting, monitored surveillance cameras, clear windows, and visible security personnel, were in place to deter crime and protect the victim at the time of the shooting?
  • Was there any suspicious activity or suspicious persons on property prior to 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 property owner or management lacked adequate security to protect its visitors, the family of Tommy Micah Lavette may seek justice and elect to pursue legal claims and substantial compensation for their loss.

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 the family of Tommy Micah Lavette retain a capable law firm who will work without delay to protect their interests.

OUR RESULTS: OVER $100 MILLION IN VERDICTS AND SETTLEMENTS FOR OUR CLIENTS

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

Click Here to Find Out How to Choose the Right Attorney

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.