ANNAPOLIS, Md. (Legal Newsline) – The shooting deaths of two teenagers in a Maryland parking lot are not the fault of the property’s owner.
The Maryland Court of Special Appeals ruled that way on Jan. 28 in a lawsuit over a 2016 shooting in Capitol Heights. The crime is unsolved, and the parents of two teenagers who died have lost their effort to seek damages from property owner Regency Lane LLC.
The lawsuit says Regency failed to provide adequate security measures and failed to protect tenants and their guests from foreseeable criminal activity.
And though Regency does have a duty to protect tenants from foreseeable criminal activity, the court ruled, the parents failed to show any failure on Regency’s part caused the deaths of Brian Davis and Todd Webb, Jr. In fact, the shooter remains unknown.
“(A)ppellants produced no evidence regarding the circumstances of the shooting,” Judge Kathryn Grill Graef wrote. “No witness was identified who had personal knowledge of how the shooting occurred or what precipitated it.
“Appellants produced no evidence of the identity of the shooter or shooters or whether they were trespassers, tenants or someone else authorized to be on the premises.”
Davis and his cousin arrived at the party of one of Regency’s tenants on the night of Oct. 29, 2016. Webb, who lived at the complex with his mother, tried to get in but failed at some point during the night. It is unknown where Webb went between this and the shooting.
By 1 a.m., Davis was outside waiting on a taxi to take him home. There were other people from the party in the parking lot in front of the apartment the party was in.
At 2.45 a.m., multiple gun shots were heard. Davis, Webb and Gleason Wood were killed.
Davis’ and Webb’s parents alleged Regency’s security was inadequate because part of the fence around the building was broken.
A history of criminal activity there was also produced – “This document shows multiple service calls relating to alleged crimes against persons, including assaults, robberies and fights, as well as five reports of gunshots or shootings and multiple calls reporting drug activity,” Graef wrote.
But ultimately, given the unsolved nature of the crime, the plaintiffs could not allege fault on the part of Regency.
“There was no evidence whether the gate was broken on the night of the shooting or whether the shooter(s) entered the premises through that gate,” Graef wrote.
“Appellant produced no evidence of the timeframe during which the events leading up to the shooting took place, whether it happened quickly or over a period of time. There was, therefore, no evidence to support a finding that extra security patrols or other security measures could have prevented the shooting.”