106 So. 3d 227
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- Plaintiffs Debbie and Joseph Frank sued for damages from a slip-and-fall at Boomtown Belle Casino in Harvey, Louisiana.
- The incident occurred in March 2009 when Mrs. Frank allegedly slipped in a wet substance in a casino restroom.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment under La. Rev. Stat. 9:2800.6, arguing lack of evidence of notice.
- Security manager Shano testified she spoke with Mrs. Frank, observed a housekeeper outside the restroom, and did not recall a wet floor sign or cleaning since the fall.
- Mrs. Frank stated there were no warning signs, she did not know how the floor became wet, and could not identify the liquid or its duration prior to the fall.
- Maria Arias, a housekeeper, testified she mopped with a wet floor sign and prevented patrons from entering, but she could not recall the accident and did not report any accidents while employed at the casino.
- The trial court granted summary judgment, finding plaintiffs failed to prove the required elements under 9:2800.6.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Boomtown Belle Casino is a merchant under 9:2800.6 | Wicker treats casino as a merchant | Casino not contested here; procedures matter | Yes, Boomtown Belle Casino is a merchant under 9:2800.6. |
| Whether plaintiff proved all three elements of 9:2800.6(B) | There is evidence of potential hazard and notice | Plaintiffs failed to prove actual or constructive notice or creation of the hazard | Plaintiffs failed to prove knowledge/creation of the hazard; summary judgment proper. |
| Whether plaintiff created genuine issues of material fact requiring trial | Deposition evidence shows possible hazard | No concrete evidence of notice or creation of hazard | No genuine issue; record lacks proof of notice or hazard creation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pellegrin v. Louisiana-I Gaming, 93 So.3d 645 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2012) (applies 9:2800.6 to a casino; casino deemed a merchant)
- Richardson v. Louisiana-1 Gaming, 55 So.3d 895 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2010) (casino as merchant; application of statute to betting venues)
- Smith v. Casino New Orleans Casino, 101 So.3d 507 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2012) (casino premises as merchant under 9:2800.6)
- Allen v. Wal-Mart, 850 So.2d 895 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2003) (summary judgment burden shifting; plaintiff must come forward with evidence)
- White v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 699 So.2d 1081 (La. 1997) (strict burden on plaintiff under 9:2800.6(B))
- Matthews v. Banner, 996 So.2d 1161 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2008) (de novo review of summary judgment; standard)