Camille Blanton, a partner at Wilson Elser in West Palm Beach who represented Mizner Park, did not respond to a call or an email requesting comment.

The dispute dates to April 2017, when Rayment used an elevator within the parking garage at Mizner Park, according to the amended complaint. And while on the elevator, Rayment sustained a severe traumatic brain injury.

At trial, the main point of contention was whether Mizner Park could be held liable for the ceiling panel collapse or if the negligence was on the elevator company.

Blanton argued to the jurors that the fallen ceiling panels were part of an emergency exit hatch that four locks on the outside of the elevator secured. Therefore, those hatch and locks were the "responsibility of Otis Elevator," who was a nonparty in the lawsuit.

Meanwhile, Shaked argued that Mizner Park, as the property owner, could hire a company, such as one that provides elevator maintenance, to help ensure the property is safe.

Still, the property owner was ultimately responsible for the maintenance and safety of the inside of the elevator, he argued. Shaked claimed the injury occurred on Mizner Park's premises and the entity had a nondelegable duty to keep the property safe.

To prove this point, plaintiff's counsel, at the trial, emphasized and had testimony about a contract that allegedly dictated that Mizner Park would be the one responsible in such a situation. And since Mizner Park had a nondelegable duty, whether the jury assigned a percentage of the blame to another entity was irrelevant, Shaked recalled.

"They're the ones that drafted the contract and they created the terms, and then, they were trying to shift the blame to the elevator maintenance company," Shaked said. "The fact that they looked the jury in the eye and blamed another company did not sit well with them."

Now, after a six-day trial and nearly five hours of deliberation, the jury returned a $6 million verdict award to Rayment.

Sagi Shaked, left, and Cory D. Lapin, right, of the Shaked Law Firm. (Courtesy photos)

The award consisted of $300,000 for past pain and suffering and $5.7 million for future pain and suffering. And the lawyers have since moved for attorney fees.

For Rayment, a single 34-year-old father to a 5-year-old daughter, the award will help him compensate for his inability to operate a motor vehicle and obtain medical assistance for his reoccurring seizures that he suffers from due to the personal injury, the attorneys said.

"This ruling means justice to our client," Lapin said. "It means property owners can be held accountable; they can't blame someone else. If you're going to accept someone's business, the least you can do is keep them safe."