Cook v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 795 F. Supp. 2d 1269

Plaintiff Cook slipped on a banana in the Wal-Mart parking lot in Enterprise, Alabama after purchasing office supplies on July 9, 2008.
Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P. removed the case to federal court; Wal-Mart moved for summary judgment and Plaintiff opposed.
Court applies Alabama premises-liability standard: invitee must show defendant’s ordinary care and notice of a dangerous condition.
There is no evidence of actual notice or deliberate neglect by Wal‑Mart; no evidence Wal‑Mart had been delinquent in monitoring the lot.
Plaintiff argues the banana’s condition/appearance supports a constructive-notice inference; court finds age alone insufficient and requires trial evidence to determine notice; denies summary judgment at this stage to allow full trial.
Conclusion: Wal‑Mart’s summary-judgment motion is denied; issues of constructive notice to be determined at trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Wal‑Mart had actual or constructive notice of the banana hazard	Cook argues the banana’s condition and the witnesses’ observations support notice.	Wal‑Mart did not have actual or constructive notice; the evidence does not show it acted delinquently.	Denial of summary judgment on notice issue; trial needed to decide notice.
Whether the banana’s age or condition supports a reasonable inference of constructive notice	Banana was mashed/rotten, implying it had been on the lot long enough to create a duty.	Age alone is insufficient; inference must be supported by evidence; speculation not allowed.	Evidence insufficient at summary judgment to infer constructive notice; trial required.

Cash v. Winn-Dixie of Montgomery, Inc., 418 So. 2d 874 (Ala. 1982) (duty to maintain premises and constructive notice when substance is dirtied or mashed)
Dunklin v. Winn-Dixie of Montgomery, Inc., 595 So.2d 463 (Ala. 1992) (constructive notice can be shown by time or actual notice or delinquency in discovery/removal)
Maddox v. K-Mart Corp., 565 So.2d 14 (Ala. 1990) (constructive notice analysis for hazards in parking lots)
F.W. Woolworth Co. v. Ney, 239 Ala. 233, 194 So. 667 (Ala. 1940) (age of banana alone insufficient to prove notice; danger may have arisen recently)
S.H. Kress & Co. v. Thompson, 267 Ala. 566, 103 So. 2d 171 (Ala. 1957) (historical context for notice analysis in premises liability)
Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Bennett, 267 Ala. 538, 103 So. 2d 177 (Ala. 1958) (perishable matter in store context; limited inference for constructive notice)
Patterson v. Foodtown Stores, Inc., 282 Ala. 477, 213 So.2d 211 (Ala. 1968) (case-specific facts dictate notice analysis)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (summary judgment standard: genuine issue of material fact required)