304 So.3d 143
La. Ct. App.2020Background
- On July 9, 2017, Russell McDonald slipped and fell at Boomtown Casino’s buffet; plaintiffs alleged permanent injuries from a foreign substance on the floor.
- Plaintiffs alleged Boomtown created or had notice of the hazard and failed to exercise reasonable care under La. R.S. 9:2800.6.
- Surveillance video showed an employee mopped the area about four minutes before the fall, placed/adjusted a warning cone in the area, and McDonald fell so close to the cone that his foot struck it.
- McDonald testified he saw the cone before he fell; plaintiffs contend he fell outside the cone-marked zone and that the cones did not adequately warn.
- Boomtown moved for summary judgment; the trial court granted it, dismissing the McDonalds’ petition with prejudice. The McDonalds appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs can prove the La. R.S. 9:2800.6 elements (unreasonable risk, merchant notice/creation, failure to exercise reasonable care) | McDonald fell outside cone-marked area; water created an unreasonably dangerous condition Boomtown created/should have known about | Video and testimony show mopping, cone placement, and plaintiff’s admission he saw the cone; therefore plaintiff cannot prove an unguarded, unreasonably dangerous condition or lack of care | Court affirmed summary judgment for Boomtown: plaintiffs failed to establish required elements |
| Whether Boomtown exercised reasonable care by using warning cones (adequacy of warning) | Two cones were insufficient; placement did not adequately warn patrons | Cones were visible, placed in the center of the risk area, and plaintiff admitted seeing them and struck one when falling | Court held cones were adequate warning and Boomtown exercised reasonable care |
Key Cases Cited
- Samaha v. Rau, 977 So. 2d 880 (La.) (summary judgment reviewed de novo; mover’s burden explained)
- Matlock v. Brookshire Grocery Co., 285 So. 3d 76 (La. App. 2 Cir.) (plaintiffs bear heavy burden under La. R.S. 9:2800.6; failure to prove any element is fatal)
- Rowell v. Hollywood Casino Shreveport, 996 So. 2d 476 (La. App. 2 Cir.) (summary judgment affirmed where plaintiff admitted seeing a warning cone)
- Green v. Brookshire Grocery Co., 280 So. 3d 1256 (La. App. 2 Cir.) (reversed summary judgment where cone visibility was disputed, creating a genuine issue of material fact)