Amador, Carmen v. Wal-Mart Puerto Rico, Inc, KLAN202400663

Carmen Amador filed a damages claim against Walmart Puerto Rico, Inc. after falling victim to a gift card scam, alleging Walmart failed to act diligently to mitigate the loss once notified of the fraud.
Amador, a highly educated professional, withdrew $50,000 from her bank after being misled by scammers claiming to be federal agents and purchased Walmart gift cards, providing their details to the scammers.
Walmart inquired about the reason for the large gift card purchases at the time of sale; Amador misrepresented her intentions, citing donations for earthquake victims.
After realizing the scam, Amador notified Walmart, but much of the funds had already been spent by the fraudsters.
The trial court granted Walmart’s motion for summary judgment, finding that Walmart had no legal duty to prevent or mitigate Amador’s loss under the circumstances.
Amador appealed, arguing procedural errors in the handling of requests for admissions and an improper legal conclusion regarding Walmart's duty.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Duty of Care by Walmart	Walmart should have acted to block gift cards once notified of fraud.	Walmart had no legal duty to block gift cards; the fraud was due to third parties and plaintiff’s negligence.	No duty: Retailers are not required to prevent such fraud absent specific knowledge of incapacity or restriction.
Proximate Cause/Nexus	Walmart’s inaction enabled the loss after being notified.	The plaintiff’s own actions and the primary actions of the scammers broke the causal chain.	Plaintiff’s own negligence and scammers' conduct were the proximate cause, not Walmart’s actions.
Procedural – Requests for Admissions	Error in not automatically deeming requests admitted when Walmart’s response was late.	The trial court acted within discretion and plaintiff failed to timely challenge the procedural ruling on appeal.	No abuse of discretion in handling requests; procedural complaint was waived.
Adequacy of Opposition to Summary Judgment	Proper opposition was filed; summary judgment not warranted.	Opposition failed to specify and properly dispute Walmart's statements of fact as required by rule.	Plaintiff’s failure to properly oppose deemed Walmart’s facts admitted; summary judgment was proper.

None with official reporter citations provided in this opinion. The key authorities referenced (Chorney v. Target Corporation and Patel v. Citibank Corporation) are unpublished or out-of-jurisdiction opinions and are not listed here per instructions.