On July 30, 2022, Plaintiff Gary Stanhope attended a Luke Bryan concert at the Xfinity Theatre in Hartford, Connecticut with friends. The group stood on the asphalt walkway in the general admission area, between Sections 500 and 600, behind the railing separating the lawn from the reserved seating. At approximately 10:00 P.M., Stanhope was assaulted and sustained serious injuries.
Russell Kolins, Stanhope’s liability expert, opined that Live Nation failed to adequately deploy security, failed to conduct a written risk assessment, and failed to implement adequate security policies and procedures.
Defendant Live Nation Worldwide, Inc. d/b/a Xfinity Theatre filed this motion to preclude the testimony of Kolins due to his alleged lack of qualification as an expert for (1) large concert venue security; (2) the alleged unreliability of Kolins’ analyses; (3) and the claimed lack of “fit” of his opinions to the facts of the case.
Security Expert Witness
Russell David Kolins is a practicing Licensed Private Detective and Security Consultant/Practitioner. He celebrated his 55th year in private practice in August 2024. He is a Board-Certified Criminal Defense Investigator and holds a specialized Bachelor of Science Degree in Security Management. Kolins served three terms as the elected Chairman of the ASIS International Hospitality, Entertainment and Tourism Council.
Discussion by the Court
A. Kolins is Qualified
Kolins possesses years of experience as a security consultant, holds a certification and bachelor’s degree in Security Management, and served as leadership at the ASIS International Hospitality, Entertainment, and Tourism Security Council. He has been admitted to testify as a security expert in other courts and has spoken on premises security and crowd management.
Live Nation argued that Kolins has never managed a 22,000-person venue and thus lacked the necessary qualifications. However, the Court held that Kolins does not need to match the exact subtype of security venue.
B. Kolins’ Methodology is Reliable
Live Nation argued that Kolins’ expert testimony is not based on an identifiable methodology. It asserted that Kolins’ report and depositions reveal no identifiable methodology for his conclusions and that he did not review any history of prior incidents, did not review crime data, did not read witness depositions, or conduct a site visit.
The Court found that Kolins explained how his analysis, methodology, and sources met the standard required for him to testify.
Kolins details his methodology and application to the facts of this case. He utilized authorities such as the American National Standards Institute on Crowd Management and the International Association of Venue Managers. Kolins then details how he took the various factors from the methodology and applied them to the facts at hand. He discussed the foreseeability of crowd density and congestion, as well as alcohol sales. Kolins analyzed the deployment of security personnel and cameras. Kolins also discussed the security planning and protective measures utilized by Live Nation. Finally, he addressed the response of security personnel to crises and incidents. In each section, Kolins references the standards of the security community and analyzes how Live Nation met or did not meet those standards.
C. Kolins’ Opinions Fit the Facts of the Case
Live Nation argued that Kolins’ testimony did not fit the facts of the case. Live Nation asserted that the literature cited is dated, and the opinions are boilerplate or general.
Kolins offered testimony that is important to the issues of negligence. First, he provided an overview of the responsibility of venue managers such as Live Nation and the duties of the facility supervisors regarding security policy and procedures. Additionally, Kolins offered his expert testimony as to the crowd management plans for concert events speaking on the seating arrangement, crowd flow, density of concertgoers, and prior incidents at the concert. Finally, Kolins offered his opinions as to why the security was inadequate including how no security appears to have witnessed the assault itself, the lack of video camera surveillance, and the venue’s responsibility to identify and correct those issues. The Court found that Kolins provided testimony that fits the facts of the case. He described the responsibilities, standards, and alleged failings of Live Nation in connection with the assault on Stanhope.
Held
The court denied Live Nation’s motion to preclude the testimony of Russell Kolins.
Key Takeaway
An expert’s credentials do not need to be unassailable in order for their testimony to be admissible. Federal Rule of Evidence 702 stated that “if scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.”
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Stanhope V. Live Nation Worldwide, Inc. |
| Docket Number: | 3:24cv1342 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, Connecticut |
| Order Date: | May 11, 2026 |
Leave a Reply