Two years ago, a young man from Oceanside, California, was killed by a security guard. The young man's mother filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the security guard and the company that employed him. Though the lawsuit was filed a while ago, it is only now about to go to court.
There are a number of reasons why a family member would choose to sue after the death of a loved one. For one, compensation from a lawsuit can help the family with some of the financial challenges that can arise after an unexpected death. But another reason why people file lawsuits in these kinds of situations is to hold the negligent party responsible for their actions.
There were no details provided about the lawsuit when it was originally filed. However concern has been raised over the way that security guards are hired in California. Apparently the security guard, when applying for the position he held when the incident occurred, had not provided any former employers' information.
The company that hired him was not provided any information for references. Typically, references are provided by the applicant so that the prospective employer can check for any prior problems in the applicant's history. This can help prevent future issues.
But the mother believes that the security company was negligent in not getting references from the security guard. Despite the lack of that information the security guard was hired. Had he provided references, a check would have shown that he had been terminated from a previous position as a police officer.
Should hiring procedures be scrutinized? If the security guard's employer required references, would that have prevented the death of the young man? Would stricter procedural guidelines reduce the risk of these types of shooting incidents in the future?