The Law

Suhib Yousef, an 18‑year‑old employed by Green's Grocery, a convenience store in Charleston starting in April 2020. In July 2020 Yousef experienced an armed robbery at the store. Yousef was traumatized by the robbery, struggled after the incident and wouldn’t return to the store.

Suhib Yousef's uncle, Mahmoud Yousef, owns Green's Grocery. He took his nephew to a therapist, and taught him how to use a gun at a gun range, and then purchased a gun for the store. Yousef returned to the store, and was jumpy when customers entered. Over time, he started feeling normal.

Two months after the armed robbery, David Wilson entered the convenience store to purchase a cell phone charger. He pretended to walk away with the charger, which lead to a confrontation. Yousef asked Wilson to leave the store. Yousef first armed himself with a taser which made Wilson more belligerent. Yousef upgraded to a machete and Wilson started spitting. Then the handgun came out. Wilson exited the store but was still acting in a threatening manner while Yousef kept asking him to leave. Wilson then rushed back into the store toward Yousef in an attempt to disarm him, and Yousef shot Wilson. Wilson died the following day.

Yousef was charged with murder, but the circuit court dismissed the murder charge finding:

Yousef was not at fault in bringing on the difficulty, rather he was acting lawfully in his place of business when Wilson initially approached him. When Wilson (actually or pretending) to shoplift a charger, Yousef firmly but respectfully told Wilson "Don't play with me." Yousef, apparently believing that Wilson was disrupting his business, had the right to demand that Wilson leave. Wilson immediately became belligerent. Wilson's continuous refusal to leave coupled with his aggressive actions, gave Yousef a legitimate reason to threaten the use of force. Wilson, after temporarily leaving, re‑entered the store, displaying a clear intent to commit an Assault and Battery upon Yousef. When Wilson physically attacked Yousef, he placed Yousef in reasonable fear of imminent serious injury. Accordingly, Wilson's actions gave Yousef the statutory right to use lethal force.

The Wilson estate sued Suhib Yousef, Green's Grocery and Mahmoud Yousef for:

• negligence
• gross negligence
• wrongful death
• survival
• negligent supervision
• negligent entrustment

Suhib Yousef was dropped from the case. The estate argued that they are not holding Suhib Yousef responsible, but the store and its owner created a dangerous environment:

1. created a dangerous situation by arming Yousef at work with a machete and a firearm
2. were acting unlawfully by employing a non‑immigrant alien and giving him access to a firearm
3. entrusted Yousef with a firearm despite his inexperience in handling one, when they knew or should have known Yousef did not have a concealed weapons permit and could not possess a firearm legally
4. entrusted Yousef with a firearm when they knew or should have known he was "jumpy" and "scared of everyone"
5. failed to ensure Yousef was emotionally fit to handle a firearm

Although the Protection of Persons and Property Act does not explicitly address immunity for third parties, the Court found that extending immunity to the employer was consistent with the statute’s purpose. The Act codifies the common‑law castle doctrine and reflects the legislature’s intent that law‑abiding individuals should be able to defend themselves “without fear of prosecution or civil action.”

Allowing a civil suit against the employer, the Court reasoned, would undermine that intent by permitting plaintiffs to circumvent immunity through indirect claims.

“Extending immunity to Respondents in this case is a logical extension of the Act consistent with legislative intent, ”the Court wrote.

In affirming the dismissal, the South Carolina Supreme Court sent a clear message: when deadly force is justified under the Protection of Persons and Property Act, immunity is comprehensive. It protects not only the individual who used force but, in appropriate circumstances, the employer as well.

For retailers and property owners, the case underscores the importance of understanding how statutory immunity interacts with traditional tort principles—and how a justified act of self‑defense can reshape the entire liability landscape.

(Moore v. Green's Grocery (Supreme Court of The State of South Carolina, Appellate Case No: 2024‑001429))

Heard: March 2026
Decided: June 2026

Feature Articles

If you have an opinion on the retailing or retail real estate industries, take this opportunity to share your thoughts. Articles should run between 400 and 800 words. Topics can, be general in nature, consumer observation or specific to retail concepts or practices.

Articles will be posted for at least one week and will then be placed in the Editorial Archives. All articles submitted will be read and considered but we cannot guarantee publication. Each published article will carry the submitters byline (if desired) and is a free service to our community.

Article ideas and suggestions are also always welcomed. Contact info@retailtenants.com