applying Vermont law upholding jury verdict imposing partial liability on commercial landlord for injuries sustained during robbery of premises, when better security measures had been promised
How later courts described this case
- applying Vermont law upholding jury verdict imposing partial liability on commercial landlord for injuries sustained during robbery of premises, when better security measures had been promised
- “In order for a landlord to have a duty to protect tenants from third party crimes, there must be ‘special circumstances’ outside the ordinary course of the landlord-tenant relationship…. Factors influencing whether or not a duty exists include ‘the degree of control possessed by the landlord, the foreseeability of the danger, the extent to which the landlord had undertaken specific protective measures, and the adequacy of the evidence supporting the essential element of proximate causation.’”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
VAN GRAAFEILAND, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
Plaintiff sued as the third party beneficiary of defendant’s promise to provide a cash-safe system, which promise, plaintiff alleges, was secured for the benefit of him and his fellow employees. I concur in the affirmance herein on that theory alone.