It’s 2026, and to the thrill of every trick-or-treater, costume-loving partier, and exuberant celebrant, it’s a once-in-seven-years miracle… Halloween is on a Saturday! Anytime a major party holiday falls on a weekend, bars, downtown districts, and organized events expect large crowds.
For most people, the night will be safe and fun—but any crowded event bears the risk of violence breaking out. When that happens, it can leave victims and families with a hard question: Aside from the person who committed the crime, did anyone else have a responsibility to prevent it?
There’s a legal answer to this, though it’s not a simple one. Negligent security is a type of claim under premises liability law. We can see from a recent Florida lawsuit how these types of claims work—and how they can get complicated.
The Orlando Halloween shooting
November 1st, 2024, shortly after 1 a.m.: A gunman, 17-year-old Jaylen Dwayne Edgar, opened fire into a crowd during the downtown Orlando Halloween celebration. Two people were killed and seven others were injured. The Orlando police chief estimated that anywhere from 50,000 to 100,000 people were downtown at the time of the incident. The shooter was found guilty in criminal court in August 2026.
However, a criminal conviction doesn’t provide compensation to the victims’ families. If a family believes it is entitled to compensation for wrongful death or other liability, they need to file a civil lawsuit… which these families did, in 2025. On October 29, 2025, the families of the victims filed a lawsuit against the City of Orlando and Downtown Power, LLC, the owner of Wall Street Plaza. The suit alleges negligence in crowd control, security planning, and overall public safety measures during Halloween, which is one of the largest annual events in Orlando. It was estimated that there were 75,000 participants on the night of the shooting.
Read more:
Downtown Power, the owner of the plaza where the shooting took place, distanced itself from the lawsuits and argued that the shooting didn’t happen on plaza property. Since the lawsuit is still pending, the city spokesperson was not able to comment on this.
This particular case is still making its way through the court system, but it does raise questions that anyone should understand about liability and compensation if you’re heading out to a highly populated event.
What is negligent security?
The property owner or business is generally not responsible for a crime committed on the property by a stranger. As one Georgia appellate court said, a property owner is not an insurer of an invitee’s safety. However, there can be liability if the owner knew or should have known that violence was a real risk and failed to take reasonable steps to address it.
There are three questions typically involved in a negligent security claim:
- Was the crime foreseeable?
This is usually what decides the case. The court will typically use one of three tests to determine whether a particular crime was foreseeable:
a. Specific harm
b. Prior similar incidents
c. Totality of the circumstances
Many states favor a broader approach. In 2023, the Georgia Supreme Court held that evidence of substantially similar prior criminal activity; closer in time, proximity and type; may be probative in the foreseeability analysis, but is not required. Foreseeability can be important if the event is anticipated to be a large, alcohol-fueled crowd, if there were past incidents at the same event, and if there have been police warnings.
Following the Orlando shooting, the mayor said he was frustrated to have to share news of additional lives lost to gun violence, which is the type of history a court might take into consideration. - Were the security measures reasonable?
It’s not enough for the plaintiff (i.e. victim) to show that the crime was foreseeable. There’s only liability if the proprietor is negligent, meaning they did not exercise due care to prevent that crime from happening on the property. Lawyers will review evidence related to staffing levels, bag checks, lighting, crowd-flow plans, coordination with police, and whether the defendant followed its own security policies. - Who controlled the area?
This echoes back to the Orlando plaza owner’s argument.
Duty typically follows control.
Identifying the correct defendant can depend on which party controlled the security measures that failed. At a large public event, control can be divided among a city that issued the permits and polices the streets, private property owners, bars and venues, event promoters, and hired security companies. A defendant that didn’t control the place where the violence happened has a strong argument that it did not have a duty there. However, a defendant whose event, crowd, or security plan created or shaped the danger might have a duty that extends beyond its property line. Courts often have to resolve these disputes using detailed and thorough evidence.
State law matters to the outcome
Laws about negligent security vary widely by state. Florida is a good example—in 2023, Florida passed HB 837, which changed these claims significantly. Negligent security cases under the new law require the trier of fact to consider the fault of any defendant who contributed to the injury or death, including criminals. Prior to the new law, the jury was not permitted to apportion fault to the third party criminal actor who intentionally harmed a plaintiff. In practice, a jury may now assign most of the blame to the shooter, who rarely has assets, and reduce the amount owed by a negligent business. But the same law also shortened the deadline in Florida; the statute of limitations for negligence claims, including negligent security, was reduced from four years to two years.
Additionally, there are other aspects to a lawsuit when it’s filed against a government agency. In the Orlando case, the families’ attorneys said that the filing took some time because state law requires six months’ notice when a public agency is involved in a lawsuit. Other states also have similar notice rules, immunity protections, and damage caps for public entities. However, a missed notice deadline can block a claim before it begins.
What to do if you’re injured at a crowded event
If you or a family member is injured at a Halloween (or any holiday) event or crowded gathering, take these steps:
Ultimately, the person who commits a violent act is always the responsible party. But if a business, property owner, or event organizer is profiting from a large crowd, the law might also hold it responsible for taking reasonable precautions. If the precautions aren’t taken, a victim could have a claim. Cases depend on foreseeability, control, and state law. An early review by an experienced attorney can make a significant difference.
Happy Halloween! 🎃
Filing a Lawsuit for Psychological Injury from a Halloween Scare
If a Halloween display or attraction was so frightening that it resulted in lasting emotional harm, you may be able to seek compensation through a lawsuit.