Virginia: University Massacre and College Deaths
In re April 16, 2007 Massacre at Virginia Tech University. Represent 20 families who suffered devastating losses as a result of the massacre of students and faculty on the campus of Virginia Tech. Numerous clients lost loved ones, while others suffered severe and permanent injuries as a result of violent gunshot wounds. While Virginia Tech was widely praised (by its own officials and from many outside sources) for its handling of the events leading to and following the tragedy, our investigation revealed substantial evidence demonstrating the University's potential liability for gross negligence. That evidence included the disclosure of e-mails from University personnel confirming that certain buildings had gone into lockdown following the murders in West Ambler Johnston and prior to the onset of the larger massacre at Norris Hall, and that University personnel had been warned to stay off campus before Cho opened fire at Norris Hall. As well, the evidence revealed that the University Policy Group revised the e-mail correspondence ultimately sent out at 9:26 a.m., removing references to the facts that one student had died and another was in critical condition at an area hospital as a result of gunshot wounds suffered in a dormitory room. As a result of the delay in sending this e-mail or any other meaningful warning, and the revision of its content that rendered it ineffective and misleading, students and faculty never received timely, accurate, deserved warnings about the actual danger on campus. As a result, many left their apartments and dormitory rooms (positions of safety), and (unlike certain University personnel) walked straight into harms way oblivious of the dangers and need to protect themselves. To date, Virginia Tech personnel have not acknowledged such wrongdoing. Following negotiations with the most senior legal representatives for the Commonwealth of Virginia and University, an historic settlement valued in excess of $11 Million was reached, which was made available to all victims of the tragedy and, ultimately, accepted by nearly all victims or their representatives. Any amount of compensation could never reasonably compensate these families, and the settlement in this case necessarily took into account significant legal hurdles facing the families in potential litigation, such as restrictions of sovereign immunity and damage caps. Among the settlement terms, seriously injured victims will receive substantial compensation in addition to health care insurance and other benefits for the rest of their lives. Families who lost loved ones will receive substantial compensation and other benefits, although, again, Virginia law regarding sovereign immunity unfairly reduced the amount of funds that should have been available to compensate all of the victims for their unprecedented hardship and loss. Families will also be entitled to meetings with university officials, the Governor, and to oversee management of a $1.75 Million Charitable Purpose Fund, which will make funds available for campus safety and security, victims remembrance activities, and crime victims safety and related educational organizations. Ideally, these funds, and the continued, tireless work of these dedicated families, will contribute to the prevention of similar tragedies and loss of life. Of the many lessons learned from this tragedy one stands out: States officials should be prohibited from enacting laws that shield themselves from the legal consequences of their own wrongdoing. The families of the Virginia Tech massacre should have been entitled to the same legal remedies as all citizens, notwithstanding the fact that government officials failed to protect their loved ones.
Estate of Deceased College Student v. Alpha Tau Omega Fraternity. Represented the family of a freshman at Old Dominion University who aspirated on his vomit and died following the fraternity's Big Brother/Little Brother initiation night. At the beginning of that evening, four fraternity pledges sought to satisfy the requirements for obtaining membership. By the end of that evening, all four had lost consciousness from alcohol intoxication. The Client died later that morning, and another pledge was rushed to the hospital in critical condition. Discovery in the case uncovered the local chapter's "Top 100" list of fraternity memories, and 11 of the top 12 memories involved drinking or puking from alcohol. The Washington Post featured this incident in an article focusing on the prevalence of these types of fatalities in college. The family accepted a substantial financial settlement prior to trial, which also included non-monetary terms designed to forever change the chapter, its alcohol policies, and prevent similar tragedy. More about this case can be read here.
Client v. Band, Landlord, and Numerous Others. Represented a young man who sustained a traumatic brain injury and other extensive injuries when he and four others were pushed out of a third-story window at a music concert at "Solar Haus" in Blacksburg, Virginia. For some 20 or so years, Solar Haus had been holding crowded, commercial concerts despite the fact that it was built and zoned exclusively for residential use and lacked a public hall permit. During the concert, which was held on the third floor of the apartment, part of the audience was encouraged to mosh by the band, and this continued without control by the concert's sponsors. The group of moshers stumbled into the Client and four or so other attendees who were standing away from the moshing at the back of the room. The Client fell back against a mattress that was apparently covering a window so that noise from the concerts did not disturb neighboring residential properties. The window frame broke away, and the Client and four others fell three stories onto concrete. One person died from the fall. The litigation was settled prior to trial against all defendants for a substantial sum of money. Media coverage of this case can be viewed here.
John Doe, a Minor v. Unidentified Military Academy et al. Represented a family in civil claims resulting from numerous sexual assaults of a minor student by a superior cadet. The cadet was able to gain access to the student's dorm room by virtue of the authority conveyed upon him through the private military academy's chain of command. A substantial, confidential financial settlement was obtained for the young victim and his mother shortly after litigation was filed. The cadet who inflicted injuries on my client was incarcerated.
