Bourne v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that after Tri there is no reasonable possibility that a plaintiff who slipped and fell in a Wal-Mart store can successfully bring negligence causes of action against both the assistant store manager and Wal-Mart
• rejecting contention that store manager owed the plaintiff a duty of care independent from the store’s duty
• denying motion to remand where plaintiff did not allege facts supporting a finding that the store manager owed the plaintiff a duty of care independent from the store’s duty of care
• “In light of Tri, the court is satisfied that the principles of Leitch are controlling in this [premises liability] action”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).