Friday, September 4, 2026
Page 1
Suit Seeks Liability on Part of Company That Hired Felon as Security Patrol Officer
Complaint Says Employer Was Negligent in Hiring, Retaining Man Who, According to Complaint, Victimized Woman, 75, Who Had Angered Him
By a MetNews Staff Writer
A security company that employed a man with a history of violence should be held liable for his conduct in following the vehicle driven by the plaintiff with whom he had “a routine traffic interaction,” blocking her automobile, reaching into it, wresting from her a cellphone on which she had captured images of his patrol car, injuring her hand in the process, and deleting the photos, a complaint in the Santa Clara Superior Court alleges.
The pleading was filed Wednesday against First Alarm—which it blames for hiring and retaining the patrol officer—as well as its employee, Joshua Terrel Hawkins. Bringing suit was Sharon Brink, an Arizona resident who was in California to care for her sister following her surgery.
Brink was 75 at the time of the July 25, 2025 encounter.
Employee’s Background
Hawkins, according to the complaint, in 2022 killed a dog, was convicted of felony cruelty to animals, and was placed on formal probation, with conditions that he not own nor care for animals for 10 years and undergo counselling for behavioral problems.
The pleading recites that “[i]n or about 2022, multiple restraining orders were issued against Defendant HAWKINS in Santa Clara County Superior Court on findings of harassment, threats, and violence directed at family members, including threats to kill.”
Also “[i]n or about 2022,” the complaint says, “a temporary restraining order was issued against Defendant HAWKINS in Santa Clara County Superior Court to protect an elder and other household members from physical abuse, threats, and intimidation, requiring him to move out, stay away, and relinquish firearms.”
2025 Assault
It adds that “[o]n or about March 9, 2025, approximately four months before the incident” involving Brink, Hawkins “assaulted another person at his apartment complex in Santa Clara County and was charged with assault and battery,” noting:
“The altercation, which was captured on surveillance video, involved Defendant HAWKINS becoming angry, throwing objects from a desk, and pushing an object that struck another person in the neck.”
That conduct, the complaint avers, entailed a “sudden loss of temper” which was of “the same character of conduct that injured Ms. Brink approximately four months later,” commenting:
“FIRST ALARM was on notice that Defendant HAWKINS was unfit to be assigned public-facing duties and entrusted with a company vehicle.”
Defendant’s Duty
The pleading sets forth:
“Each of the foregoing matters was a matter of public record and was reasonably discoverable through the ordinary criminal history record inquiries that FIRST ALARM was required and expected to make, including the state and federal criminal history record checks contemplated by the Alarm Company Act and the Private Security Services Act.”
It adds:
“FIRST ALARM owed Ms. Brink and the public a duty of care not to place unfit and dangerous personnel on the road and in contact with the public, and FIRST ALARM breached that duty through the negligent, careless, and reckless business practices alleged herein.”
The complaint asserts negligence; negligent hiring, training, supervision, and retention; negligent entrustment of a vehicle; false imprisonment; assault and battery; and elder abuse. It seeks general and special damages, punitive damages, and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest.
In connection with the incident, the complaint says, Hawkins “was charged with burglary, assault, elder abuse, and false imprisonment by violence,” that he “entered a plea in that matter,” and “was sentenced on or about April 15, 2026.”
The case is Brink v. First Alarm, 26CV502428.
Copyright 2026, Metropolitan News Company