The movie theater massacre that unfolded in Aurora, Colo., isunfathomable to anyone of sound mind. Now that the dust has begunto settle, the all but certain onslaught of litigation has begun.TMZ reports that Torrence Brown Jr. has filed the first lawsuit.While Brown was not physically injured, his friend A.J. Boik waskilled after being shot in the chest.

Brown's claims begin to show the litigation quandary facing oursociety in the aftermath of many tragedies.

Certainly those who were injured or killed are due their day incourt. Without a doubt there is both criminal and civil culpabilityagainst accused killer James Holmes, who took the lives of twelveinnocent moviegoers and injured dozens more. Many of the injuredwill require a lifetime of medical care for paralysis, traumaticbrain injuries and other catastrophic conditions. Certainly jurieswill convene and judgments will be obtained against the lonegunman, but the reality is that they will merely be symbolic.

While the directions and intentions of the Holmes defense teamare not certain, the likely outcomes are lifelong incarceration,the death penalty, or in the event of a successful insanity plea,life in a state mental institution. No matter the outcome, theculprit will have neither the will nor the means to pay as much asa penny on the inevitable judgments.

So what is the plan for the advocates of the injured and howcould that impact claims organizations charged with defending thosethat they insure?

How will the cases of victims who were hurt, killed or, in thecase of Brown, traumatized by the event play out in court? TMZreports that Brown has hired Donald Karpel to represent him. Brownand Karpel's three target defendants are:

1. The theater. Karpel claims it was negligent for the theaterto have an emergency door in the front that was not alarmed orguarded. It's widely believed Holmes entered the theater with aticket, propped the emergency door open from inside, went to hiscar and returned with guns. The question is whether or not areasonably prudent theater owner should have anticipated a madmanwould enter the theater through the emergency doors and attack apacked house.

2. Holmes' doctors. Karpel says it appears Holmes was on severalmedications—prescribed by one or more doctors—at the time of theshooting and he believes the docs did not properly monitorHolmes.

3. Warner Bros. Karpel says “Dark Knight Rises” was particularlyviolent and Holmes mimicked some of the action. The attorney saystheater goers were helpless because they thought the shooter waspart of the movie. Karpel tells TMZ, “Somebody has to beresponsible for the rampant violence that is shown today.”

Why isn't Karpel going after the culprit himself? Probablybecause he realizes that collection would be an exercise infutility. The reality is that Karpel, like many trial lawyers,understands that deep pocket defendants will often pay rather thanface the uncertainty of a jury, even when there may be nonegligence on their part. This is part and parcel to what is wrongwith the American judicial system—the most litigious and costliestin the world.

As trial lawyers plot their strategy, claims organizations facedwith defending the inevitable litigation should give considerationto other potential targets. What about Holmes' parents who raisedthe madman? Or the University of Colorado that gave him aneducational grant that he may have used to purchase the guns? Orthe gun manufacturers, sellers and distributors? While some of thismay seem a stretch, it is not beyond the realm of possibility asvictims seek compensation, which is certainly due, for theirinjuries.

The challenge for those defending these actions will be immense,in particular when the injuries sustained are serious. But whatabout the defense of the claims from those who were not physicallyinjured but are claiming mental anguish? Or lawsuits from those notin the actual theater but in close enough proximity to witness orhear the rampage?

The only thing that seems certain is that the lawsuit filed byBrown may be the first, but it will be far from the last. As thecases play out and more defendants are identified, others willcertainly fall in line. The biggest question is whether the personultimately responsible will be held accountable in civil court.

Christopher Tidball is an executive claims consultant and theauthor of Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential RulesTo Take Your Claims Organization From Ordinary ToExtraordinary. He is a twenty-year insurance industry veteranhaving served in multiple leadership capacities. To learn more,please visit www.christidball.com or email[email protected].