MD Supreme Court hears arguments on Towson U liability for campus shooting

Listen to this article

The Maryland Supreme Court heard arguments on Thursday in a case about Towson University’s liability for a shooting at an on-campus party in September 2021.

Then-student Catherine Torney and two others were injured after midnight at an unsanctioned pop-up party on the campus’s central Freedom Square.

The party grew to around 400 people and was reportedly rowdy and unruly, with many people drinking and smoking cannabis. The DJ stopped the music at one point and urged the crowd to calm down. Four university police officers were supervising the party, and two allegedly recommended shutting the party down, but they did not do so.

Torney sued the university for negligence and negligent training and supervision of the campus officers. She argued that the university owed her a duty of care and should have taken more proactive steps to prevent the shooting.

“The university knows that these events happen,” her lawyer, Joseph Cammarata, told the court Thursday. “Did we have to know that a gun was going to be used? No.”

The Baltimore County Circuit Court dismissed the case, and the Maryland Appellate Court last September affirmed that decision, ruling that the university would only be liable if it had knowledge that would make the imminent harm foreseeable.

Appellate Court Senior Judge James Eyler, who was specially assigned, wrote, “a noisy, large gathering of young people, even one that includes arguments among the attendees, is insufficient to signal that violence might be imminent.”

One of the issues in the case is whether Torney should be considered an “invitee” on the university’s property, or a “bare licensee.” Torney argues she was an invitee, which requires the owner of the property to “use reasonable and ordinary care to keep the premises safe.”

Arguing for the public university, Maryland Assistant Attorney General Ryan Dietrich, arguing for Towson, cautioned against “Monday-morning quarterbacking” about Towson’s liability, as Torney has not sued the alleged shooter or party organizers.  The prosecutor said the case shouldn’t be considered a “watershed event” in the development of case law on gun violence.

He said Towson fulfilled its legal obligations by having officers present to oversee the party and shouldn’t be found liable for acts committed by a third person.

“The possibility (of violence) is not enough,” Dietrich said Thursday. “There has to be a reasonable probability.”

The state argued in its brief that Torney should be considered a “bare licensee” on the property, which requires less care from the landowner. Citing a 2025 Maryland Supreme Court decision, the state says that with such visitors, landowners must “refrain from willfully or wantonly injuring them and from creating a new source of danger without warning.”

It argued that even if she is considered an invitee, she hasn’t alleged facts sufficient to prove the university was negligent.

“Although Ms. Torney’s injuries were unfortunate, there is simply no basis for laying blame at the feet of the University under the circumstances of this case,” the state’s brief says. “[H]olding the University responsible here would be a significant departure from, and expansion of, longstanding principles of tort liability.”