Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Joycelyn Griffin v. Wal-Mart Louisiana, L.L.C., 15-30685 (2015)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 15-30685 Visitors: 23
Filed: Dec. 02, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 15-30685 Document: 00513291316 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/02/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 15-30685 December 2, 2015 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JOYCELYN GRIFFIN, Plaintiff–Appellant, versus WAL-MART LOUISIANA, L.L.C., Defendant–Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana No. 3:14-CV-110 Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:
More
Case: 15-30685 Document: 00513291316 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/02/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 15-30685 December 2, 2015 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JOYCELYN GRIFFIN, Plaintiff–Appellant, versus WAL-MART LOUISIANA, L.L.C., Defendant–Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana No. 3:14-CV-110 Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * This is an ordinary retail slip-and-fall case under Louisiana law per diversity jurisdiction. Although the plaintiff pleaded that she fell because of the defendant store’s failure to remove a foreign substance on the floor, she * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. Case: 15-30685 Document: 00513291316 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/02/2015 No. 15-30685 testified that she does not recall what caused her to fall. The defendant moved for summary judgment, which the district court granted, issuing a succinct but sufficiently thorough ruling that carefully examined the facts in light of Louisiana law. The court concluded, “Upon bur- den shifting to non-movant, Plaintiff falls short of carrying her burden of proof because the statute does not allow the factfinder to make inferences of the condition, but requires Plaintiff to make a positive showing. The Court con- cludes Plaintiff has failed to make a positive showing of the existence of the condition prior to the fall.” The summary judgment is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons con- vincingly stated by the district court. 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer