When a deli can be held responsible
New York businesses owe their lawful visitors a duty to keep the premises reasonably safe. When the harm comes from a crime by a third party, that duty has limits. A deli is not an automatic insurer of your safety, and it is not liable simply because an assault occurred inside or just outside its doors.
To hold a deli responsible under a negligent security theory, you generally need to show:
- The assault was foreseeable — for example, prior violent incidents, robberies, or a known pattern of crime at that location or in the immediate area.
- The deli failed to take reasonable security measures in response (working locks, functioning lighting, cameras, a guard where warranted, or controlling known troublemakers).
- That failure was a substantial factor in causing the attack and your injuries.
What “foreseeable” means in New York
Foreseeability is the heart of these cases. New York courts look at whether the business knew, or should have known, that a criminal attack was likely. The strongest evidence is a history of similar crimes — past assaults, armed robberies, or police calls at that specific deli. Without some indication of a prior risk, courts are often reluctant to hold a business liable for a sudden, unpredictable act of violence by a stranger.
Proving the deli’s security was inadequate
Even when an attack is foreseeable, you must still connect the deli’s choices to what happened. Useful evidence can include surveillance footage, broken or absent locks and lighting, the absence of security where the crime history called for it, employee statements, and police reports documenting earlier incidents. An attorney typically moves quickly to preserve video, because deli camera systems often overwrite footage within days.
Time limits and shared fault
In New York, the deadline to file most personal injury lawsuits is three years from the date of the assault. CPLR §214 New York also follows pure comparative negligence, so your compensation can be reduced by your share of fault but is not automatically barred. CPLR §1411 The person who attacked you can also be sued, though such defendants are frequently unable to pay — which is often why the property owner’s responsibility matters.
What your claim may be worth
There is no set figure for these cases. Value depends on the severity of your injuries, medical costs, lost income, the strength of the foreseeability evidence, and how clearly the deli’s security failures contributed. Every case is different, and prior results do not guarantee future outcomes. If you were assaulted at a deli, bodega, or similar business, learning how negligent security law applies to your situation is the right first step.
Frequently asked questions
Can I sue a deli if a stranger assaulted me with no warning?
It depends on whether the attack was foreseeable. If the deli had a history of violent crime, robberies, or police calls and ignored basic security, you may have a claim. A truly random, unforeseeable attack with no prior warning signs is much harder to pin on the business.
What if the assault happened just outside the deli, not inside?
A deli's duty can extend to areas it controls, such as an entrance or adjacent walkway. Whether the business is responsible depends on control of that space and whether the harm was foreseeable. An attorney can review where exactly the attack occurred.
How long do I have to file a lawsuit in New York?
Most personal injury claims in New York must be filed within three years of the assault under CPLR 214. Different deadlines can apply in unusual situations, so it is best to confirm your specific timeline early rather than risk missing it.
Can I still recover money if I was partly at fault?
Yes. New York uses pure comparative negligence under CPLR 1411, so being partly at fault reduces your recovery by your percentage of responsibility but does not bar your claim entirely.
Do I have to sue the person who attacked me too?
You can pursue the attacker, but criminal defendants often cannot pay a judgment. That is why a negligent security claim against the deli or property owner, when the facts support it, is frequently the more meaningful path to compensation.