By Juan Cordero, Esq. — Florida Premises Liability & Negligent Security Attorney | Miami Beach, Florida

Florida negligent security law has always centered around one critical issue: foreseeability. Businesses are not insurers of public safety, but they do have a duty to take reasonable security measures when they know — or should know — criminal activity is likely to occur.

The recent appellate decision in Varone v. Publix Super Markets, Inc. has generated substantial discussion among Florida premises liability attorneys because it reinforces a long-standing principle in Florida law: plaintiffs must present sufficient evidence of prior criminal incidents to establish notice and defeat summary judgment.

But foreseeability is not merely about counting prior shootings at a property.

At its core, negligent security law is about crime prevention. One of the most important principles in modern security analysis is Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED), commonly associated with the "Broken Windows Theory."

The theory recognizes that visible disorder, unchecked nuisance crimes, deteriorating conditions, loitering, and low-level criminal conduct can create an environment where more serious violence becomes increasingly foreseeable.

Foreseeability should not begin only after someone is shot.

If a shopping center or grocery store repeatedly experiences any of the following, those are warning signs that security conditions may be deteriorating:

• Shoplifting incidents
• Vehicle burglaries
• Graffiti
• Narcotics activity
• Trespassing
• Aggressive panhandling
• Loitering by vagrants
• Disturbances
• Escalating police responses

And those warning signs matter.

A location like a major grocery chain attracts large volumes of customers daily. Many stores contain ATMs, create predictable foot traffic patterns, and become gathering points within a community. Criminals often target locations where victims are distracted, carrying cash, loading groceries, or entering parking lots at night.

If there are twenty-five prior incidents involving thefts, vehicle break-ins, narcotics complaints, trespassing, or recurring suspicious activity either on the property or in the immediately surrounding area, management should recognize that security concerns may be escalating.

Florida courts have historically recognized that prior incidents both on and off the property may be relevant when analyzing foreseeability. Regional managers and local property operators cannot simply ignore:

• Repeated police activity
• Crime trends in surrounding neighborhoods
• News reports
• 911 call patterns
• Visible disorder
• Recurring criminal behavior near their locations

Foreseeability requires vigilance.

The purpose of negligent security law is not simply to assign blame after tragedy occurs. It is to encourage reasonable preventative measures before an innocent customer, mother, child, or employee becomes the victim of violence.

The Varone decision also raises difficult factual questions that often become central in negligent security litigation:

• Was there surveillance footage showing the suspect casing the property?
• Was the suspect wandering the parking lot for an extended period beforehand?
• Were employees or security personnel aware of suspicious behavior?
• Had law enforcement previously responded to disturbances nearby?
• Did the surrounding area show escalating crime trends?
• Or was the event truly an isolated and unpredictable act occurring in an area with minimal criminal history?

Those questions matter because negligent security cases are intensely fact-driven.

If a violent act occurs in an upper-middle-class neighborhood with virtually no prior violent crime, minimal police activity, and no meaningful indicators of danger, foreseeability becomes harder to establish. But if the evidence shows recurring gateway crimes, increasing disorder, suspicious activity, or prior incidents nearby, then the analysis changes significantly.

The law does not require property owners to predict every criminal act. But it does require businesses to act reasonably once warning signs become apparent. And warning signs are not limited to prior shootings alone.

In my opinion, Varone should not be interpreted as eliminating negligent security liability in Florida. Instead, it reinforces that plaintiffs must present detailed, admissible evidence demonstrating that the criminal act was foreseeable under the totality of the circumstances.

Future cases involving the same location could look very different. If another violent incident were to occur at the same Publix location after the Varone incident, plaintiffs in a future case could potentially argue that the prior violent event itself placed the business on heightened notice of security risks.

At that point, courts may examine whether reasonable security upgrades were considered or implemented after the earlier incident. That could include examining:

• Security patrols
• Lighting improvements
• Camera coverage
• Off-duty police presence
• Trespass enforcement
• Suspicious activity monitoring
• Employee training
• Crime-prevention policies

Once a serious violent crime occurs at a location, foreseeability arguments often become stronger in subsequent litigation because the business can no longer argue it lacked notice that such violence could occur there.

Ultimately, negligent security law exists because prevention matters. The goal is not merely to react after tragedy strikes. The goal is to recognize danger early enough to stop tragedy from happening in the first place.

Juan Cordero is a Florida premises liability and negligent security attorney with over 26 years of experience representing injured clients throughout Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Martin County, and the Treasure Coast. He is also a CPTED-trained attorney and Adjunct Professor of Law at Indian River State College.

If you or a loved one was injured due to inadequate security at a business, store, or property in Florida, contact Juan Cordero Lawyers for a free consultation.

Call 305-525-8957 — Available 24/7

Related Reading:

• Why You Need Florida's Best Negligent Security Lawyers — CPTED-Trained, DCA-Ready, and Built to Beat the Foreseeability Defense
• What Is Negligent Security and When Can You Sue in Florida?
• Shot at a Florida Hotel or Motel? The Property May Be Liable
• Negligent Security Injury Claim: Florida Victim's Guide