Kelley Kronenberg Secures Appellate Victory in $3M Mall Evacuation Case

Kelley Kronenberg Partner/Business Unit Leader Aaron Neifeld secured an important appellate victory for his shopping mall management client when the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment, eliminating $3,000,000.00 in exposure from a premises liability claim arising from a mall evacuation. 

The case arose when the plaintiff alleged injuries during an evacuation of a major shopping mall. The evacuation was triggered when a fire alarm was activated by an employee of a commercial tenant who was vaping in the vicinity of the alarm sensor. The plaintiff claimed she sustained injuries during the evacuation and filed a negligence action against the mall management company seeking $3,000,000.00 in damages. 

Aaron defended the case by arguing lack of proximate cause—specifically, that even if the alarm activation was the “but for” cause of the plaintiff’s fall, it was not the legal cause because the linkage between the alarm activation and the plaintiff’s fall inside a tenant store was too attenuated. Under Florida law, proximate cause requires both cause-in-fact and legal causation, meaning the connection between the defendant’s conduct and the plaintiff’s injury must be sufficiently direct and foreseeable. 

Additionally, Aaron successfully argued that the plaintiff never pled any allegations in her complaint relating to the mall’s alarm system. She never alleged the alarm system was defective or failed to work properly—instead, the alarm functioned exactly as designed when activated by smoke or vapor. Aaron contended this constituted a “brand new theory of liability” that was improper because the plaintiff never pled it in her complaint, and parties cannot expand their claims beyond what was alleged in their complaint. 

The trial court agreed with Aaron’s arguments and granted summary judgment in favor of the shopping mall management company. The plaintiff, represented by a prominent plaintiffs’ firm, appealed to the Third District Court of Appeal challenging the summary judgment ruling. 

On appeal, Aaron defended the trial court’s ruling by demonstrating that the causal chain between the alarm activation and the plaintiff’s injuries was too indirect and remote to constitute legal causation. The alarm system worked properly by activating when it detected vapor, and the evacuation procedure was implemented as designed. Any injury the plaintiff sustained during the evacuation inside a tenant store was not a foreseeable or legally cognizable result of the alarm functioning as intended. 

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s award of summary judgment in the defendant’s favor. This appellate ruling confirmed that property owners and managers cannot be held liable for injuries that occur during emergency evacuations when alarm systems function properly and the causal connection to the plaintiff’s injuries is too attenuated. 

This published appellate decision provides important precedent for premises liability defendants, particularly shopping centers, and property managers, establishing that proximate cause requires more than but-for causation when the chain of events between the defendant’s conduct and the plaintiff’s injury becomes too indirect. The case also reinforces the principle that plaintiffs cannot pursue theories of liability at trial or on appeal that were never pled in their original complaint. 

For property managers and shopping centers, this victory demonstrates that well-functioning safety systems that operate as designed will not create liability even when injuries occur during evacuations, provided the causal connection is too remote to satisfy the legal causation requirement. 

Stay up to date on the latest developments in general liability and third-party insurance. Click here to read the latest issue of our newsletter, “In the Know: General Liability Edition.”   

Learn more about Kelley Kronenberg’s General Liability and Third-Party Insurance Defense Division. Click here.