Most people attacked, robbed, or assaulted on someone else’s property assume the only legal path forward is a criminal case against the attacker. That assumption leaves a significant claim on the table. Louisiana law allows victims to bring a separate civil lawsuit against the property owner whose failure to provide reasonable security made the attack possible. The criminal case and the civil case run on independent tracks; one doesn’t depend on the other.
This is premises liability, and precision matters. The wrong deadline, a missed defendant, or a misunderstanding of how Louisiana courts measure foreseeability can unravel an otherwise strong case. At Talley Anthony Hughes & Knight, we’ve represented Louisiana families through matters like these for more than a century, and we know how these claims are built and litigated in St. Tammany Parish courts.
What Negligent Security Means Under Louisiana Law
Negligent security is a civil claim rooted in Louisiana Civil Code Articles 2315 and 2317.1, the foundational statutes governing delictual responsibility. The claim targets the property owner’s conduct, not the attacker’s. When a business, apartment complex, hotel, or parking lot invites the public onto its premises, Louisiana law requires that owner to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable criminal harm. The duty doesn’t arise because a crime happened; it arises because the risk of crime was foreseeable and the owner failed to address it.
Louisiana Civil Code Article 2322 adds another layer for building owners specifically, holding them answerable for damage caused by ruin, neglect to repair, or a vice or defect in the structure’s original construction when they knew or should have known of the problem and didn’t exercise reasonable care. Broken entry locks, inoperable gate systems, and unlit stairwells can qualify as structural defects with direct security implications.
The Four Elements You Must Prove
Duty
The property owner must have owed the victim a duty of care. Customers, tenants, and invited guests are classified as invitees under Louisiana law. The invitee category receives the highest level of legal protection. If you were on the property legitimately, this element is usually not in dispute.
Breach
The owner must have failed to meet that duty. Common examples include broken or propped-open entry doors, surveillance cameras that were inoperative or improperly aimed, no security personnel during hours when criminal activity was known to occur, and inadequate lighting in parking areas, stairwells, or corridors.
Causation
The security failure must be directly connected to the harm. It’s not enough that security was poor; the specific deficiency must have contributed to making the attack possible or more likely.
Damages
The victim must have suffered actual, compensable harm: medical expenses, lost income, physical pain, emotional trauma, and in the most serious cases, wrongful death damages recoverable by surviving family members.
How Louisiana Courts Determine Foreseeability
Foreseeability is the hinge on which most negligent security cases turn. The Louisiana Supreme Court addressed this directly in Posecai v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., establishing a balancing test that weighs the foreseeability of criminal harm against the burden of requiring the property owner to guard against it. The greater the foreseeability and the severity of the potential harm, the heavier the duty the court imposes.
In practice, a property with a documented history of violent incidents may be required to hire on-site security personnel. A property with a lower risk profile might satisfy its duty through improved perimeter lighting, visible cameras, or access-controlled fencing. The Posecai framework isn’t a fixed standard; it scales with the specific risk the owner knew or should have known about.
Building that foreseeability argument requires concrete evidence. Several sources are particularly useful:
- Prior incident reports filed with local law enforcement involving the same property
- Crime statistics for the surrounding neighborhood or commercial area
- Complaints or warnings previously submitted to property management by tenants, employees, or other visitors
- Internal communications between management and security contractors discussing known risks
The stronger the documented history of prior criminal activity, the harder it becomes for a property owner to argue the harm was unforeseeable.
Who Can Be Held Responsible (and When Liability Extends Beyond the Property Owner)
The property owner is the obvious starting point, but they aren’t always the only party with exposure. Depending on how the property was managed and secured, liability can reach property management companies, business operators leasing the space, and contracted security firms that assumed specific duties over access control or patrol.
Louisiana’s fault system under Civil Code Article 2323 allows fault to be allocated across multiple defendants simultaneously, including the attacker. For incidents occurring on or after January 1, 2026, Louisiana applies a modified comparative fault rule: a victim found to be 51% or more at fault can’t recover damages, while a victim found to be 50% or less at fault may still recover, with the award reduced in proportion to their share of responsibility. For incidents occurring before January 1, 2026, the prior pure comparative fault system applies, under which a victim’s recovery was reduced proportionally regardless of their percentage of fault. In either case, identifying every responsible party matters. Insurance coverage limits and financial resources vary significantly between a solo property owner, a regional management company, and a national security contractor.
The Filing Deadline Has Changed
For years, Louisiana’s one-year prescriptive period for delictual actions under Civil Code Article 3492 governed negligent security claims. That statute was repealed effective July 1, 2024. Claims arising after that date are now governed by Louisiana Civil Code Article 3493.11, which establishes a two-year prescriptive period running from the date of injury.
Nearly every resource we’ve reviewed still cites the old one-year window. If you’ve read that deadline elsewhere, it’s outdated. The correct deadline for claims filed after July 1, 2024 is two years.
A longer window doesn’t mean there’s time to wait. Surveillance footage at commercial properties is routinely overwritten within 30 to 90 days. Witnesses move, memories fade, and physical conditions at the scene change. The two-year period preserves your right to file; it doesn’t preserve the evidence that makes the case worth filing.
Negligent security claims in Covington and across St. Tammany Parish are filed in the 22nd Judicial District Court, located at the St. Tammany Parish Justice Center at 701 N. Columbia Street in Covington. That court has original jurisdiction over all civil matters in the parish, and understanding its local procedural expectations is part of building a well-prepared case.
What to Do If You Think You Have a Claim
A crime on someone’s property isn’t just bad luck when the harm was foreseeable and the owner chose not to address it. Louisiana law provides a civil path to accountability that operates entirely separately from any criminal prosecution, and the evidence that makes or breaks that path starts disappearing quickly after the incident.
If you or a family member was harmed at a property in Covington, Mandeville, or anywhere in St. Tammany Parish, our attorneys are available around the clock for a free consultation, in person or virtually. Call us at (985) 313-8146.