Historic Jury Verdicts Award Families of Murdered Security Guards Hundreds of Millions
Although the specific elements vary by jurisdiction, wrongful death claims generally allow surviving spouses, children, parents, or estates to recover damages when a death is caused by negligence, recklessness, or intentional conduct. In negligent security and premises liability cases, the central question is not whether the shooter intended to kill—that issue belongs to criminal court—but whether the defendant owed a duty of care, breached that duty, and thereby contributed to the conditions that made the death foreseeable. Courts nationwide increasingly recognize that when businesses or property owners operate in environments with known risks of violent crime, their failure to implement reasonable safety measures can be a substantial contributing cause of a fatal outcome.
Wrongful death damages typically include both economic losses—such as lost income, benefits, and support—and non-economic damages, including loss of companionship, guidance, and emotional support. In many jurisdictions, juries may also consider the pain and suffering endured by the decedent prior to death, as well as the mental anguish of surviving family members. Where the evidence shows conscious disregard of known dangers, some states also permit punitive damages, intended to punish and deter egregious misconduct. These principles frame the verdicts discussed below, each of which reflects a jury’s determination that death was not merely tragic, but legally preventable.
Jury Awards $779 Million to Family of Murdered Florida Security Guard
In December 2025, a jury in Gadsden County, Florida returned a staggering wrongful death verdict of approximately $779 million arising from the fatal shooting of a security guard at an internet café in Havana, Florida. The case underscores how wrongful death law applies not only to the act of violence itself, but to the business decisions that exposed workers to extreme risk.
The decedent, Lewis Butler, was working as a security guard when an armed robbery occurred in November 2023. Butler was shot during the robbery and later died from his injuries. The shooter was prosecuted criminally, convicted of first-degree murder, and sentenced to life in prison. The civil case, however, focused on the café’s operations and whether its owners failed to respond to a documented history of violent crime at the location.
At trial, the family presented evidence of prior armed robberies and dangerous incidents at the café. Despite this history, the business allegedly continued operations without sufficient changes to security practices. The jury’s extraordinary verdict reflects a finding that the defendants’ failure to mitigate known risks played a meaningful role in placing Butler in harm’s way, resulting in a compensable wrongful death under Florida law.
How Jurors Reached a $779 Million Verdict
Across the United States, wrongful death law exists to address a fundamental gap left by the criminal justice system. When a person is killed as a result of another’s negligence or misconduct, criminal prosecution may punish the individual perpetrator—but it does not compensate the surviving family, nor does it address the role that institutions, businesses, or property owners may have played in allowing the fatal conditions to exist. Wrongful death statutes, which exist in every state in some form, provide a civil remedy designed to shift the economic and human costs of preventable death away from families and onto those who failed to act reasonably to prevent harm.
Dallas, Texas Jury Awards $32 Million in October 2025
In 2025, a Dallas County jury returned a $32 million wrongful death verdict in a negligent security case involving a fatal shooting at a commercial property in Northeast Dallas. Texas law, like many jurisdictions, ties wrongful death liability to foreseeability—whether prior criminal activity was sufficient to put a property owner on notice of the danger.
The plaintiffs introduced evidence showing that the property had experienced repeated violent crimes before the shooting. Despite these warning signs, the defendants allegedly failed to implement adequate security measures or alter operations to address escalating risks. The case did not hinge on the criminal intent of the shooter, but on whether the defendants breached their duty to provide reasonably safe premises.
The jury evidently concluded that the death was not random or unavoidable. Instead, it was the foreseeable result of operating a property in a high-crime area without reasonable safeguards. Under Texas wrongful death law, that breach supported substantial damages for the family’s loss, reinforcing that property owners cannot ignore known dangers without legal consequence.
$50 Million Verdict Arising from Shooting at a Senior Center
In Saldana v. Progressive Management of America, Inc., Myrtle Grove Acquisitions, LLC, et al., a jury in Escambia County, Florida returned a $50 million verdict arising from a 2020 shooting at a senior apartment complex in Pensacola. Although the victim survived, the case illustrates the same wrongful death and negligent security principles applied in fatal cases: liability turns on what the defendants knew and failed to do.
David Saldana was shot six times by a neighbor after rejecting her advances and becoming the target of a false sexual assault accusation. Evidence showed that the defendants allegedly knew of the shooter’s mental health history and pattern of false reports but failed to warn residents or take protective measures. The jury found that this failure constituted negligence and awarded damages reflecting the catastrophic physical and psychological harm suffered.
While not a wrongful death case, the verdict aligns with the same legal framework—foreseeable danger, failure to act, and devastating consequences—that governs wrongful death claims nationwide.
These verdicts reflect a broader national reality: wrongful death law is increasingly being used to hold institutions accountable, not just individuals. Juries are sending a clear message that when businesses, landlords, and property managers are on notice of serious danger, inaction can be just as consequential as misconduct. For families who have lost loved ones to preventable violence, wrongful death claims provide more than compensation—they provide recognition that the loss was not inevitable, and that accountability extends beyond the person who pulled the trigger.