In January, three tourists from Ohio and Michigan were shot and killed outside of the vacation home they had rented in a Central Florida community in what authorities have described as a random and unprovoked attack. The suspect lived next door and had been arrested in 2021 for attempted murder but was acquitted by reason of insanity, and now the homeowners association and the owner of the vacation home have been accused in a civil lawsuit of negligent security and wrongful death.

The tragic killings of brothers Douglas and Robert Kraft and their friend James Puchan, who were visiting to attend a car show and auction, took place outside the vacation home they had rented from owner Marte Marcel via Airbnb. The home was located in the Indian Point Community in Kissimmee, Florida, and was next door to the suspect’s parents’ home where he lived. The homeowners association and the property owner have been sued for alleged negligent security and wrongful death by Marlisa Kraft, the widow of Douglas Kraft.

The suspect has been indicted on three counts of first-degree murder and is set to undergo mental evaluation to determine his competency for trial. According to investigative summaries from the Osceola County Sheriff’s Office, surveillance footage captured the 29-year-old pacing on the sidewalk and monitoring the victims’ vehicle before pulling a handgun and shooting them. Investigators later recovered 34 bullet casings that had been fired from two guns of different calibers.

Deputies and a witness reported that the suspect was seen wearing all black, holding a gun with an extended magazine, and running into his garage before closing it. After obtaining a search warrant, investigators found a black hooded sweatshirt, black pants and black shoes in the suspect’s bedroom, where they also located two guns under his mattress with the serial numbers filed down as well as magazines and ammunition matching those used in the attack.

The lawsuit states that the accused was arrested in May 2021 for injuring a man and damaging multiple vehicles after discharging a firearm more than 20 times at a Kissimmee gas station and then fleeing the scene. He was later arrested but was ultimately found not guilty by reason of insanity, and he returned to his home in the community in late 2022.

The complaint states that Indian Point Homeowners Association knew or through reasonable efforts would have known of the suspect’s violent behavior, and therefore it had a duty to its residents and short-term rental guests to exercise care to maintain their safety and protect them from reasonably foreseeable criminal acts. It alleges that the association and its representatives knew or should have known that in the years prior to the triple homicide, law enforcement had been contacted several times to address dangerous issues at the suspect’s residence, including batteries, suspicious incidents, disturbances, and calls pertaining to a mentally ill person and the invocation of the Baker Act.

The sheriff’s office has stated it received 41 calls for service for the suspect’s address from September 2006 to April 2022. Sixteen of the calls involved the suspect, the majority of which taking place when he was a minor, and none of the 41 calls were made by residents in the area.

Not addressing the prior history of service calls, the lawsuit alleges that the HOA knew or should have known that the accused had a violent criminal history and had shot and injured an innocent victim without provocation, and that the home neighboring his residence was used as a short-term rental property where unsuspecting transient guests would foreseeably interact with him without any knowledge that he was known to be violent and erratic.

The complaint further asserts that the HOA and the homeowner were negligent by failing to provide adequate security and protections for such invitees after being put on notice that the accused individual was a violent and erratic person with access to firearms and a history of shooting at people without provocation. It also accuses the HOA of failing to ensure that the owner was aware of the danger and requiring him to warn prospective short-term rental guests, and of failing to remove the alleged perpetrator from the community.

The lawsuit seeks damages for the past and future mental pain and suffering of Kraft’s widow as well as for the past and future loss of the support and services he would have provided.

Florida community associations and property owners can be held liable for negligence if they fail to address a dangerous resident after receiving documented notice. In this case, it is unclear whether the HOA received notice of the suspect’s violent behavior, and the police records do not evidence any calls made by residents or members of the HOA. Associations that receive notice of a dangerous resident must maintain safe common areas and protect residents from foreseeable risks such as those presented when they receive warnings about a specific dangerous person.

Association governing documents typically require boards to act when a resident violates safety rules or threatens others in the common areas. The steps they can take include cease-and-desist warnings, restricting access to shared community spaces and amenities, and alerting police immediately when violent or criminal acts occur.

Communities facing such issues should work closely with qualified legal counsel to properly chronicle all such dangerous and volatile incidents. They should also seek assistance from local law enforcement if situations escalate involving violent residents who are known or claim to have firearms. The state’s red flag firearms law may allow law enforcement to petition for a Risk Protection Order to temporarily remove firearms from those who pose a significant danger to themselves or others. Association records and incident reports will then become crucial to assist police in seeking such RPOs.

Despite these available measures, associations are limited in the tools they have to address chronic issues or violent behavior from individuals suffering from mental illness.

Unfortunately, sometimes conflicts must intensify before law enforcement can intervene effectively, and associations often struggle with the expense and complexity of obtaining court-ordered injunctions to temporarily or permanently remove violent individuals.

Although reasonable foreseeability may seem straightforward to allege, associations’ enforcement options are limited and, in most cases, collaborating with local law enforcement is the recommended course of action. Upon the initial indication of troubling conduct, it i imperative for associations to promptly seek advice from legal counsel to address potential issues appropriately and safeguard against adverse events.