Guiterrez Complaint

ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Mar 24 2:40 PM - CHARLESTON - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP1001469
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

) NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
COUNTY OF CHARLESTON )
) CASE NO.
ERNESTO GUTIERREZ, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) SUMMONS
)
NORTHWOODS MALL CMBS LLC, dba )
NORTHWOODS MALL, CBL & )
ASSOCIATES MANAGEMENT LLC, )
SECURAMERICA LLC aka UNIVERSAL )
PROTECTION SERVICES, LLC, )
NATHAN DAMPF, and JOHN DOES #1- )
10, )
Defendants.
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to answer the Complaint in this action,
a copy of which is herewith served upon you, and to serve a copy of your pleading to said
Complaint upon the subscribers at their offices at 25 Society Street, Charleston, SC 29401, within
30 days after the service hereof, exclusive of the day of such service, and if your fail to answer the
Complaint within the time aforesaid, the Plaintiff will apply to the Court for judgment by default
for the relief demanded in the Complaint.
BY: /s/ Brian Mickelsen

Brian Mickelsen, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
South Carolina Bar No. 104925
brian@mickelsendalton.com
(843) 804-0428
MICKELSEN DALTON LLC

25 Society Street
Charleston, SC 29401
Charleston, South Carolina

Dated: March 24, 2023
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
COUNTY OF CHARLESTON )
) CASE NO.
ERNESTO GUTIERREZ, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) COMPLAINT
) (Jury Trial Demanded)
NORTHWOODS MALL CMBS LLC, )
DBA NORTHWOODS MALL, CBL & )
ASSOCIATES MANAGEMENT LLC, )
SECURAMERICA LLC aka UNIVERSAL )
PROTECTION SERVICES, LLC, )
NATHAN DAMPF, and JOHN DOES #1- )
10, )
Defendants.
COMES NOW Plaintiff in the above-styled action and hereby files this Complaint as
follows:
FACTS
1. On February 14, 2021, Mr. Ernesto Gutierrez (“Mr. Gutierrez”) was a business invitee at
the Northwoods Mall located at 2150 Northwoods Boulevard, North Charleston, South
Carolina (“the mall”).
2. This incident occurred on Valentine’s Day, a day on which Mr. Gutierrez went to the mall
to shop with his girlfriend.
3. As they were shopping, gunfire erupted in the mall due to a dispute between two men
unknown to Mr. Gutierrez.
4. Mr. Gutierrez was shot and suffered severe and life-threatening injuries and a gunshot
wound that required emergency treatment and surgery.
2
5. At the time of the dispute between the shooters and at the shooting, Defendant Northwoods
Mall CMBS LLC owned, managed, or operated the mall and its premises.
6. During this same time, Defendant CBL & Associates Management LLC was a property
management company that exercised control over the mall and its premises.
7. During this same time, Defendant SecurAmerica LLC n/k/a Universal Protection Service,
LLC (“SecurAmerica”) was a security company hired and retained to provide security
services at the subject location and at Northwoods Mall.
8. During this same time, Defendant Nathan Kampf was the General Manager of the
Northwoods Mall and was in charge of securing, managing and operating the mall.
9. On and prior to February 14, 2021, Defendant had knowledge of myriad criminal acts on
the premises, including gang and violent activities that occurred on a regular basis.
10. Defendants knew, or should have known, of other violent and criminal acts committed on
or near the mall and its premises prior to the subject shooting, including the following:
Date Crime
2/20/2016 Possession of heroin

2/23/2016 Theft of a motorcycle
2/23/2016 Two firearms
2/28/2016 Stolen motor vehicle
3/4/2016 Simple assault
3/5/2016 Assault 3rd Degree
3/5/2016 Tampering with motor vehicles
3/18/2016 Homicide
3/18/2016 Possession of weapon during commission of crime
3/19/2016 Disturbance with weapon
3/21/2016 Assault and batter – 2nd degree
3/23/2016 Unlawful carrying
3/23/2016 Theft of a cell phone
3/29/2016 Assault and battery – 3rd degree
3/31/2016 Theft of cell phone
4/11/2016 Breaking and entering motor vehicle
4/14/2016 Theft from motor vehicle
3
4/16/2016 Trespassing after notice
4/18/2016 Larceny
4/30/2016 Trespass after notice
5/6/2016 Larceny
5/16/2016 Larceny
5/21/2016 Larceny of cell phone
5/28/2016 Trespass after notice
6/2/2016 Armed robbery
6/4/2016 Domestic violence – 2nd degree
6/16/2016 Prostitution
6/27/2016 Unlawful carrying pistol
6/27/2016 Trafficking cocaine
6/30/2016 Witness intimidation
7/2/2016 Trespassing
7/26/2016 Assault of a high and dangerous nature
7/28/2016 Larceny
8/5/2016 Stolen motor vehicle
8/10/2016 Attempted murder
8/22/2016 Assault
8/27/2016 Trespass
9/3/2016 Trespass
9/17/2016 Trespass
9/25/2016 Domestic violence – 3rd degree
9/30/2016 Larceny
10/1/2016 Trespass
10/7/2016 Trespass
10/22/2016 Trespass
10/23/2016 Mutual combat
11/16/2016 Trespass
12/19/2016 Stalking/Harassment
12/23/2016 Breaking into vehicle
12/30/2016 Intent to distribute heroin
12/30/2016 Larceny
1/7/2017 Unlawful conduct toward a child
2/23/2017 Shooting
4
3/5/2017 Trespass
3/23/2017 Possession of tools to commit crime
3/27/2017 Forcible fondling
4/13/2017 Intent to distribute cocaine
4/13/2017 Theft
4/19/2017 Trespass
5/7/2017 Assault by mob
5/25/2017 Theft of motor vehicle parts
5/27/2017 Unlawful carry of handgun
6/1/2017 Assault
6/23/2017 Trespass
7/3/2017 Discharge of firearm into dwelling
7/14/2017 Assault and Battery – 3rd degree
8/11/2017 Trespass
8/14/2017 Trespass
8/14/2017 Negligent discharge of firearm
8/16/2017 Possession of burglary tools
8/23/2017 Strong arm robbery
9/25/2017 Assault and battery
10/21/2017 Trespass
10/23/2017 Threats and intimidation
11/5/2017 Assault
12/1/2017 Assault and battery – third degree
12/2/2017 Aggravated assault
12/3/2017 Tampering with motor vehicle
12/8/2017 Assault
12/13/2017 Trafficking cocaine
12/18/2017 Discharge of firearm
12/26/2017 Stolen firearm
12/30/2017 Trespass
1/2/2018 Assault on law enforcement
5
1/6/2018 Assaulting police
1/10/2018 Trafficking MDMA/ecstasy
2/22/2018 Assault and battery – 2nd degree
2/23/2018 Trespass
2/26/2018 Theft from a vehicle
3/31/2018 Grand larceny
4/19/2018 Larceny
5/14/2018 Assault
6/12/2018 Larceny
6/15/2018 Stalking
6/16/2018 Motor vehicle theft
6/21/2018 Assault/Domestic violence – 3rd degree
7/24/2018 Larceny
7/28/2018 Larceny
7/31/2018 Larceny
8/3/2018 Pointing and possessing firearm
8/15/2018 Larceny
8/18/2018 Trespass
8/19/2018 Larceny
8/30/2018 Breaking and entering
9/1/2018 Larceny
9/6/2018 Intimidation/Reasonable fear of bodily harm
9/23/2018 Assault
10/8/2018 Breaking and entering auto
10/13/2018 Assault
10/21/2018 Larceny
10/29/2018 Purse snatching
10/19/2018 Assault
11/3/2018 Larceny
11/12/2018 Larceny
11/19/2018 Assault
12/9/2018 Larceny
6
12/18/2018 Theft of motor vehicle parts
12/21/2018 Trespass
12/23/2018 Assault
1/7/2019 Assault
1/10/2019 Breaking and entering – auto
1/15/2019 Larceny
1/15/2019 Theft
1/27/2019 Larceny
2/12/2019 Trespass
2/22/2019 Possession of firearm during crime
3/4/2019 Larceny
3/16/2019 Intimidation with reasonable fear of bodily harm
4/16/2019 Larceny
4/17/2019 Larceny
5/8/2019 Intimidation with reasonable fear of bodily harm
5/14/2019 Larceny
5/30/2019 Trespass
6/1/2019 Assault
6/1/2019 Unlawful conduct towards a child
6/13/2019 Assault
6/14/2019 Assault
6/20/2019 Assault
7/8/2019 Larceny
7/19/2019 Assault
7/24/2019 Larceny
8/3/2019 Homicide
8/4/2019 Unlawful carrying of pistol
7
8/9/2019 Assault – 3rd degree
8/20/2019 Resisting arrest
8/23/2019 Assault
9/15/2019 Assault – 3rd degree
9/17/2019 Larceny
9/20/2019 Taking by threat of force
9/21/2019 Larceny
9/24/2019 Unlawful carrying of pistol
10/5/2019 Assault
10/15/2019 Assault
10/24/2019 Intimidation / Reasonable fear of bodily harm
11/1/2019 Assault
11/18/2019 Voyeurism
11/22/2019 Assault
12/8/2019 Sexual exposure
12/15/2019 Voyeurism
12/28/2019 Sexual exposure
12/29/2019 Shots fired/heard
1/12/2020 Larceny
2/1/2020 Assault
2/3/2020 Theft
2/26/2020 Breaking and entering / larceny
3/1/2020 Larceny
3/16/2020 Unlawful carrying pistol
5/4/2020 Intimidation/Reasonable fear of bodily harm
5/8/2020 Assault
5/9/2020 Assault
5/15/2020 Assault
5/17/2020 Larceny
8
6/1/2020 Burglary – 2nd degree / Attempted Burglary
6/7/2020 Unlawful weapon possession
6/11/2020 Homicide
6/16/2020 Taking by force
6/27/2020 Larceny
8/8/2020 Assault
8/25/2020 Intimidation/Verbal Assault/Threats
9/8/2020 Larceny
9/13/2020 Assault
9/16/2020 Larceny
9/17/2020 Strong arm robbery
9/17/2020 Felon in possession of firearm
9/30/2020 Larceny
10/4/2020 Assault
10/16/2020 Shooting
10/17/2020 Assault
10/28/2020 Theft motor vehicle parts
11/5/2020 Larceny
11/7/2020 Larceny
11/17/2020 Domestic violence – highly aggravated nature
12/19/2020 Larceny
12/22/2020 Pointing and presenting firearm
12/26/2020 Larceny
1/5/2021 Assault
1/12/2021 Unlawful carrying of handgun
1/15/2021 Theft
1/16/2021 Larceny
9
1/31/2021 Larceny
2/6/2021 Unlawful weapon
2/7/2021 Larceny
PARTIES
11. Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of the State of South Carolina.
12. Plaintiff states his intention and desire to bring each permissible, proper, and authorized
claim for damages under South Carolina law, including general, special, compensatory,
consequential, economic, punitive, and other damages as proven by the evidence at trial.
13. Defendant NORTHWOODS MALL CMBS LLC (“Northwoods”) is a foreign limited
liability company authorized to transact business and conduct its affairs in the State of
South Carolina and is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court. Defendant does
business as Northwoods Mall and operates, owns, manages and advertises and holds itself
out as a large shopping mall and premises located in North Charleston, South Carolina.
14. Defendant CBL & ASSOCIATES MANAGEMENT LLC (“CBL”) is a foreign limited
liability company authorized to transact business and conduct its affairs in the State of
South Carolina and is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court. Defendant holds
itself out as the property manager for the Northwoods Mall and manages, oversees, and
otherwise controls the subject mall and its premises.
15. Defendant SECURAMERICA LLC nka UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICES, LLC
is a foreign limited liability company authorized to transact business and conduct affairs in
the State of South Carolina and is subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court.
10
Defendant holds itself out as a security company that provides security at the Northwoods
Mall for the benefit of the mall and third parties, including Plaintiff.
16. Upon information and belief, Defendant Nathan Dampf (“Dampf”) is a citizen and resident
of Charleston County, South Carolina, and is and was at all times relevant hereto an
employee/agent of CBL or Northwoods, or both, serving as the General Manager of
Northwoods Mall.
17. Defendants John Does 1-10 (“John Does”) are unknown and unidentifiable at this time,
but whose negligence harmed, caused, and contributed to Plaintiff’s injuries. Defendants
John Does 1-10 include, but are not limited to, property management companies,
independent contractors, security companies/personnel, other entities that either owned,
controlled, or managed the subject mall and its premises where the underlying shooting
occurred. These persons and/or entities will be served upon identification.
18. Defendants owned, managed, and/or operated the subject premises at the time of the
shooting identified herein. Defendants and their officers, agents and employees, were
involved in the acts or omissions in Charleston County, South Carolina which give rise to
this lawsuit. Defendants committed tortious acts or omissions in Charleston County and
are subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court.
19. Service can be made on Defendant Northwoods by serving its registered agent Corporation
Services Company located at 508 Meeting Street, West Columbia, SC 29169.
20. Service can be made on Defendant CBL by serving its registered agent Corporation
Services Company located at 508 Meeting Street, West Columbia, SC 29169.
11
21. Service can be made on Defendant SecurAmerica n/k/a Universal Protection Services LLC,
by serving its registered agent Corporation Services Company located at 508 Meeting
Street, West Columbia, SC 29169.
22. Service can be made on Defendant Dampf via personal service at his residence or place of
work which is believed to be in Charleston County, South Carolina.
CLAIMS FOR NEGLIGENCE
23. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ acts and omissions as set forth below,
Plaintiff was assaulted and shot.
24. Plaintiff was a business invitee of the subject premises and exercised ordinary care and
diligence at all times herein and under the circumstances then existing.
25. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants owned, controlled, operated, and/or managed
the subject premises, and had the legal duty to keep the premises in a state consistent with
the due regard of the safety of its invitees, including Plaintiff. Defendants likewise had a
legal duty to protect invitees, including Plaintiff, from third-party criminal attacks on its
premises. Defendants had a legal duty to warn Plaintiff of dangerous conditions on the
premises.
26. Plaintiff was a third-party beneficiary of the security services provided by Defendant
SecurAmerica per its contractual obligations to Northwoods and/or CBL, and, as such, was
owed a duty by SecurAmerica and its employees, officers and security agents to maintain
and keep the premises free of third-party criminal actions and/or unsafe conditions.
27. Defendants breached their duties owed to Plaintiff by failing to protect him from known,
dangerous persons on the premises. Moreover, Defendants breached their duties owed to
12
Plaintiff by failing to exercise ordinary care to keep the premises safe and warn of
dangerous conditions.
28. At all times pertinent to the subject shooting, Defendants, individually and by and through
their agents, servants, and employees were negligent in:
a. Failing to provide adequate security on the premises;
b. Failing to exercise reasonable care to provide a safe environment for invitees of the
premises;
c. Failing to provide proper and adequate surveillance of the premises;
d. Permitting or otherwise ignoring criminal activity on the premises;
e. Failing to properly train their employees, servants, and agents in recognizing and
correcting dangerous conditions and risks to invitees of the premises;
f. Failing to monitor the performance of their security personnel to ensure the safety of
invitees on the premises;
g. Failing to hire competent security personnel to ensure the safety of invitees on the
premises;
h. Failing to implement and follow security measures commensurate with the
recommendations of security experts and consultants;
i. Failing to have adequate patrols on the premises so as to deter dangerous activity on
the premises;
j. Failing to properly budget or allocate resources so that adequate security measures
could be implemented and maintained;
k. Failing to maintain a policy, procedure, or system of investigating, reporting, and
warning of criminal activity on the premises;
13
l. Failing to remove dangerous persons from the premises;
m. Failing to maintain, inspect, secure, patrol, and manage the premises; and
n. All other acts of negligence as may be shown at the time of trial.
29. Defendants knew of or, with the exercise of due care for the safety of invitees, should have
known of the dangerous and hazardous conditions existing on the premises and the failure
to maintain, inspect, secure, patrol, and manage the premises and that said conditions were
likely to result in serious injuries to invitees, including Plaintiff.
30. Because Defendants had knowledge of or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have
had knowledge of the dangerous environment of the premises, Defendants are liable for
the negligent supervision, hiring, training, and retention of its employees and for the
entrustment of the premises to its partners, agents and employees. This negligence
proximately caused the injuries of Plaintiff.
31. Defendants represented to invitees that the premises were properly maintained and
reasonably safe.
32. Each of the foregoing tortious acts and omissions constitute an independent act of
negligence on the part of Defendants and one or more or all of the above stated acts and
omissions proximately caused the injuries of Plaintiff. But for said acts or omissions,
Plaintiff would not have been shot and injured.
33. Accordingly, Defendants are liable for Plaintiff’s injuries, pain and suffering, and all other
elements of damages allowed under the laws of the State of South Carolina.
34. Plaintiff is entitled to recover punitive damages from Defendants because the actions of
Defendants and its agents and employees showed willful misconduct, malice, fraud,
wantonness, oppression, or an entire want of care which would raise the presumption of
14
conscious indifference to consequences. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to recover
punitive damages from Defendants in an amount to be determined by the enlightened
conscience of an impartial jury.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that:
(a) Process be issued as provided by law;
(b) Plaintiff be awarded actual damages in amounts to be shown at trial;
(c) Plaintiff be awarded all medical expenses in an amount to be proven through the
evidence at the time of trial;
(d) Plaintiff be awarded all damages including all general, special, compensatory,
economic and other allowable damages in accordance with the enlightened
conscience of an impartial jury from the Defendants and as permitted under South
Carolina law;
(g) All costs be cast against the Defendants;
(h) Plaintiff has a trial by jury; and
(i) Plaintiff has such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.
PLAINTIFF HEREBY DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY.
BY: /s/ Brian Mickelsen

Brian Mickelsen, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
South Carolina Bar No. 104925
brian@mickelsendalton.com
(843) 804-0428
MICKELSEN DALTON LLC

25 Society Street
Charleston, SC 29401
Charleston, South Carolina

Dated: March 24, 2023
15

Guiterrez Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guiterrez Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Mar 24 2:40 PM - CHARLESTON - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP1001469

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

for the relief demanded in the Complaint.

BY: /s/ Brian Mickelsen

MICKELSEN DALTON LLC

Charleston, South Carolina

Carolina (“the mall”).

to shop with his girlfriend.

unknown to Mr. Gutierrez.

wound that required emergency treatment and surgery.

services at the subject location and at Northwoods Mall.

2/20/2016 Possession of heroin

11. Plaintiff is a citizen and resident of the State of South Carolina.

13. Defendant NORTHWOODS MALL CMBS LLC (“Northwoods”) is a foreign limited

otherwise controls the subject mall and its premises.

15. Defendant SECURAMERICA LLC nka UNIVERSAL PROTECTION SERVICES, LLC

employee/agent of CBL or Northwoods, or both, serving as the General Manager of

independent contractors, security companies/personnel, other entities that either owned,

occurred. These persons and/or entities will be served upon identification.

are subject to the jurisdiction and venue of this Court.

Services Company located at 508 Meeting Street, West Columbia, SC 29169.

Services Company located at 508 Meeting Street, West Columbia, SC 29169.

Street, West Columbia, SC 29169.

work which is believed to be in Charleston County, South Carolina.

CLAIMS FOR NEGLIGENCE

Plaintiff was assaulted and shot.

their agents, servants, and employees were negligent in:

a. Failing to provide adequate security on the premises;

c. Failing to provide proper and adequate surveillance of the premises;

d. Permitting or otherwise ignoring criminal activity on the premises;

correcting dangerous conditions and risks to invitees of the premises;

invitees on the premises;

h. Failing to implement and follow security measures commensurate with the

recommendations of security experts and consultants;

i. Failing to have adequate patrols on the premises so as to deter dangerous activity on

j. Failing to properly budget or allocate resources so that adequate security measures

could be implemented and maintained;

k. Failing to maintain a policy, procedure, or system of investigating, reporting, and

warning of criminal activity on the premises;

n. All other acts of negligence as may be shown at the time of trial.

likely to result in serious injuries to invitees, including Plaintiff.

proximately caused the injuries of Plaintiff.

Plaintiff would not have been shot and injured.

punitive damages from Defendants in an amount to be determined by the enlightened

conscience of an impartial jury.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that:

(a) Process be issued as provided by law;

(b) Plaintiff be awarded actual damages in amounts to be shown at trial;

evidence at the time of trial;

economic and other allowable damages in accordance with the enlightened

(g) All costs be cast against the Defendants;

(h) Plaintiff has a trial by jury; and

PLAINTIFF HEREBY DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY.

BY: /s/ Brian Mickelsen

MICKELSEN DALTON LLC

Charleston, South Carolina

You might also like