Foreman v. Circle K Convenience Stores Inc, 6:17-cv-00296

Plaintiff Heidi Foreman slipped and fell outside the refrigerated "Beer Cave" in a Circle K store on August 26, 2016 and sued under the Louisiana Merchant Liability Act.
Foreman testified she saw an employee mopping but did not notice any wetness or warning signs before her fall.
Circle K produced store surveillance video showing Foreman entered and exited the Beer Cave twice; multiple standard yellow "wet floor" signs and a mop bucket were visible, and an employee mopped inside the store.
On the second exit from the Beer Cave, Foreman fell immediately outside the door; video shows she stood next to wet-floor signage both times she entered the Beer Cave.
Circle K moved for summary judgment arguing it exercised reasonable care by posting visible wet-floor signs; the magistrate judge recommends granting summary judgment and dismissing Foreman’s claims with prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Circle K created an unreasonable risk of harm	Floor was wet from mopping and caused the fall	Mopped floor with warning signs does not create unreasonable risk	Court: No unreasonable risk where appropriate signage was used
Whether Circle K had notice of the dangerous condition	Employee was mopping at time of fall (employee-created)	Admits employee mopped; liability hinges on notice + care	Court: Creation of condition is undisputed, but notice element satisfied by employee activity and signage context does not impose liability without failure of care
Whether Circle K failed to exercise reasonable care	Foreman: lack of effective warning; employee presence insufficient	Circle K: multiple visible wet-floor signs and mop bucket show reasonable care	Court: Circle K exercised reasonable care; signage and video defeat claim
Whether summary judgment is appropriate	Foreman: factual disputes about warnings and awareness	Circle K: video conclusively shows signs and employee mopping; no genuine issue	Court: Grant summary judgment for Circle K; plaintiff’s claims dismissed with prejudice

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard)
Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (video evidence may control facts at summary judgment)
Carnaby v. City of Houston, 636 F.3d 183 (assigning weight to videotape evidence)
Melancon v. Popeye’s Famous Fried Chicken, 59 So. 3d 513 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2011) (wet-floor signs can defeat merchant liability)
White v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 699 So.2d 1081 (La. 1997) (interpretation of Louisiana Merchant Liability Act)