Negligence Lawsuit Representation Needed

I am preparing a negligence claim against a large educational institution that failed to conduct any meaningful security process after it was alleged that I stalked a vice president during a public event. Video shows that the vice president lied. This person is known to be mentally unstable. The claim however focuses on the duty of care violations of the university that is designed to ensure the accused are contacted to get their side of story. I need a lawyer who can: • Evaluate the facts, evidence, and timelines surrounding the stalking reports and the school’s security policies • Draft and file the complaint, citing the institution’s duty of care and its lapse in providing adequate supervision and protection • Handle discovery, depositions, and settlement negotiations, keeping me informed at every stage • Prepare for trial if we cannot reach an acceptable settlement Experience with premises-liability or institutional negligence cases—especially those involving schools or universities—is essential. Familiarity with local court procedures and statutes of limitation will be critical to moving quickly. Please share any relevant case results or references, outline your proposed approach, and indicate the jurisdictions in which you are licensed to practice. Here is a draft of the complaint with assistance from AI: SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA [Civil Division] [Plaintiff Name], Plaintiff, v. ACME UNIVERSITY, Defendant. Civil Action No.: [Insert] ________________________________________ COMPLAINT – NEGLIGENCE / GROSS NEGLIGENCE Plaintiff brings this civil action against Defendant Acme University for negligence and gross negligence arising from its deliberate failure to follow its own published safety and investigative policies designed to protect members of the Acme University community. Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages for reputational, professional, and financial harm caused by Defendant’s misconduct. ________________________________________ INTRODUCTION Plaintiff is a longstanding member of the Acme University (“ACME UNIVERSITY”) community. Over decades, he has maintained meaningful ties to the institution, including: • Attending official and public events; • Serving as the uncle to a ACME UNIVERSITY undergraduate student; • Maintaining professional relationships with University officials; and • Operating a summer job training program for underserved youth on University property. Plaintiff reasonably relied on Acme University’s publicly represented safety and investigative policies, which voluntarily exceed federal standards under the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f). On March 15, 2025, during a public ACME UNIVERSITY event, a senior official accused Plaintiff of stalking. Despite written notice to Vice President Acme University, University Counsel, and other senior officials, Acme University failed to: 1. Document the allegation in its Daily Crime Log (Ex. D); 2. Coordinate with law enforcement (Ex. D, Section 4.1); and 3. Allow Plaintiff to present exculpatory evidence, including video proof disproving the allegation (Ex. C). These failures deprived Plaintiff of procedural protections, resulting in reputational harm and lost professional and financial opportunities, including exclusion from University-affiliated networking and business events (Exs. E & F). ________________________________________ PARTIES Plaintiff: [Plaintiff Name], residing in [City, State], is a longstanding member of the ACME UNIVERSITY community as described above. Defendant: Acme University, a private, nonprofit institution organized under D.C. law, operating multiple campuses in Washington, D.C., and receiving federal student financial assistance. Senior officials, including Vice President Acme University and University Counsel, oversee compliance with federal law and ACME UNIVERSITY’s voluntary safety and investigative policies. ________________________________________ JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This Court has jurisdiction under D.C. Code § 11-921. 2. Venue is proper under D.C. Code § 13-423 because the events occurred on or near ACME UNIVERSITY campuses in D.C., and Defendant maintains its principal place of business in the District. 3. References to the Clery Act are for judicial notice only; although the Act does not provide a private right of action, it demonstrates mandatory reporting and investigative standards voluntarily adopted by ACME UNIVERSITY. See Restatement (Second) of Torts § 323 (voluntary undertaking doctrine). ________________________________________ FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS A. Plaintiff’s Relationship to ACME UNIVERSITY Plaintiff reasonably understood himself to be a protected member of the ACME UNIVERSITY community, entitled to procedural safeAcme Universityards, including documentation, law enforcement coordination, and investigative review. B. Duty and Standard of Care 1. ACME UNIVERSITY voluntarily adopted policies exceeding Clery Act standards, creating a duty of care: o Coordination with law enforcement for serious allegations; o Procedures allowing accused individuals to respond and present evidence; o Transparent recordkeeping in the Daily Crime Log (Ex. D). 2. Plaintiff reasonably relied on these policies, expecting fair and objective handling of serious allegations. C. Notice and Failure to Act 1. On March 15, 2025, Plaintiff was accused of stalking by a senior official (Ex. A – Event Report). 2. Plaintiff notified Vice President Acme University and University Counsel in writing (Ex. B – Emails). 3. Defendant failed to: o Document the allegation (Ex. D, Section 2.2); o Coordinate with law enforcement (Ex. D, Section 4.1); o Allow Plaintiff to present exculpatory evidence (Ex. C); o Follow internal review procedures consistent with published safeAcme Universityards (Ex. D, Section 5.1). D. Consequences and Harm As a direct and proximate result: • Plaintiff was unable to defend himself within University channels; • Plaintiff suffered reputational harm within the ACME UNIVERSITY community and professional network; • Plaintiff lost professional and financial opportunities, including exclusion from University-affiliated networking and business events (Exs. E & F). ________________________________________   COUNT I – NEGLIGENCE / GROSS NEGLIGENCE 1. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding allegations. 2. Defendant owed Plaintiff a duty arising from: o Voluntary adoption of safety and investigative policies exceeding Clery Act standards (Ex. D); o Public statements encouraging reporting of crimes to CSAs and law enforcement (Ex. D, Section 1.1); o Institutional expectation of fair handling of serious allegations. 3. Defendant breached this duty by failing to: o Document the stalking allegation (Ex. D, Sec. 2.2); o Notify or coordinate with law enforcement (Ex. D, Sec. 4.1); o Allow Plaintiff to present exculpatory evidence (Ex. C); o Follow internal review procedures consistent with published safeAcme Universityards (Ex. D, Sec. 5.1). 4. These breaches constitute gross negligence, demonstrating reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s rights. 5. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff suffered reputational injury, loss of professional opportunities, and financial harm (Exs. E & F). 6. Defendant’s conscious disregard supports an award of punitive damages. ________________________________________ PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests judgment against Defendant Acme University, including: 1. Compensatory damages for reputational, professional, and financial harm; 2. Punitive damages; 3. Pre- and post-judgment interest; 4. Costs of suit, including attorneys’ fees; and 5. Any other relief the Court deems just and proper.

Projektin tunnus (ID): 40256680