Home – Slip and Fall – Walmart Cases Won

Walmart Settlements & Cases Won By Alan Sackrin

Sample Walmart Slip and Fall Settlements:

Below is a sample of some of the slip and fall cases Alan Sackrin has settled and won against Walmart by filing a lawsuit or by a pre-suit settlement.

• Settlement Amount: $171,000.00 – D.B. v. Wal-Mart Store
• Settlement Amount: $165,000.00 – G.F. v. Wal-Mart Store
• Settlement Amount: $60,000.00 – E.S. v. Walmart Stores, Inc.
• Settlement Amount: $59,999.00 – A. H. v. WalMart Stores, Inc. and Rubbermaid, Inc. – was wheeling a garbage can to purchase & some of the wheels fell off and she fell.  
• Settlement Amount: $58,000.00 – A.W. v. Wal-Mart Store – While shopping she slipped on a puddle of milk.
• Settlement Amount: $50,000.00 – M. M. v. WALMART STORES AND WINN-DIXIE STORES – slipped on floor while putting meat in her cart & was told later that she slipped on a banana peel. Injured back & R knee.
• Settlement Amount: $15,000.00 – M.M. v. Wal-Mart Store – While shopping in the garden department her cart became stuck on a rug/mat.

See More of Alan Sackrin’s Verdicts and Settlements

Did you already settle your claim or sign a document with Walmart?  In some instances, we may still be able to help. For example, if you signed a release within a few days after your slip and fall or another injury, but were confused thinking Walmart’s document related to medical bills being advanced then we may still be able to help you recover compensation for your injuries.

Quick Walmart Facts:

According to the Clerk of the Court’s website, the number of premises liability lawsuits filed against Walmart per year in Broward County, Florida, is:

• 2021 – 39 (through 11/11/21)
• 2020 – 58
• 2019 – 39
• 2018 – 33
• 2017 – 8
• 2016 – 3
  

Read: Attorney Fees Are Negotiable in Personal Injury Cases

Florida Walmart Case Law:

Below are appellate cases involving Walmart and slip and falls in their grocery stores.  We believe analyzing these cases gives us a view into how Walmart approaches slip and fall cases.

Silvers v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Fourth District. September 25, 2002 826 So.2d 513 2002
Shopper, who slipped and fell on way to get store cart, established prima facie case of store’s negligence.  According to plaintiff, it was raining on the day she went into Wal-Mart and, on her way toward the carts, she slipped and fell. Appellant was the plaintiff in this slip and fall case and appeals a directed verdict.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Reggie
Fourth District. July 15, 1998 714 So.2d 601 1998
Evidence was sufficient to support the conclusion that the discount store knew or should have known of the condition that caused the customer to slip and fall. Wal-Mart’s primary point is that the court erred in denying its motion for directed verdict because, so it argues, there was no evidence from which the jury, without stacking inferences, could have concluded that Wal-Mart knew or should have known of the condition that allegedly caused Mrs. Reggie to slip and fall.
 
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. King
Fifth District. December 19, 1991 592 So.2d 705 1991
Customer filed an action for personal injuries she received when she slipped and fell in a store. The Circuit Court, Volusia County, C. McFerrin Smith, III, J., awarded customer $846,000 in damages, and store appealed. The District Court of Appeal, W. Sharp, J., held that customer failed to adduce evidence from which jury could reasonably have found wal-mart at fault. At around 6:00 p.m. on a Saturday in June 1986, Ms. King slipped and fell in the sporting goods area of a Wal-Mart store.

Whitworth v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
First District. February 06, 2002 805 So.2d 1106 2002
In this slip and fall action, the trial court granted Appellee Wal-Mart’s motion for summary judgment based on the nonexistence of any genuine issue of material fact that Wal-Mart had actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition.In this slip and fall action, the trial court granted Appellee Wal- Mart’s motion for summary judgment based on the nonexistence of any genuine issue of material fact that Wal- Mart had actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition. REVERSE and REMAND for Appellee Wal-Mart to present evidence that it exercised reasonable care in maintaining its premises.

White v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
First District. December 14, 2005 918 So.2d 357 2005
Customer who slipped and fell in discount store stated cause of action for negligence against store manager. In their three-count third amended complaint, appellants alleged that appellant Lavetta White was injured in a slip and fall at a Wal-Mart Store.

Asher v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Third District. July 07, 2010 39 So.3d 484 2010
Negligent mode of operation instruction was warranted by evidence at trial of slip and fall action against discount store. While a patron at a Wal-Mart, Ms. Asher slipped and fell on a wet area on the floor.
 
Martino v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Fourth District. January 29, 2003 835 So.2d 1251 2003
Store patron had no claim for spoliation of evidence against department store that was also defendant in patron’s underlying negligence action. Here, the Martinos allege that Wal-Mart’s failure to preserve evidence has impaired their ability to prevail in the very negligence claim they have brought against Wal-Mart.

West v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
First District. September 06, 2002 825 So.2d 507 2002
Renita West appeals a final summary judgment in her slip-and-fall action which was granted in favor of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., appellee. The record contains sufficient evidence of a dangerous condition to create genuine issues as to material facts regarding both whether a dangerous condition existed and whether Wal-Mart had constructive notice of the dangerous condition.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Jenkins
Fifth District. August 25, 1999 739 So.2d 171 1999
Statement by unidentified declarant was not admissible as spontaneous statement in slip and fall action.  Jenkins sued Wal-Mart for negligence alleging that she slipped and fell in its Orange City store as a result of a foreign substance on the floor.
    
Reffaie v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Fourth District. September 05, 2012 96 So.3d 1073 2012
The trial court abused its discretion when it denied patron’s motion for a new trial based on store’s improper closing argument. Upon entering a Wal-Mart, appellant slipped and fell.  Appellant, Heather Reffaie, challenges the trial court’s final judgment, which found her eighty percent comparatively negligent for her slip and fall at a Wal-Mart store, and the trial court’s denial of her motion for new trial.
    
Thompson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Third District. March 16, 2011 60 So.3d 440 2011
It was reversible error for court to allow store’s expert’s surprise testimony, which had not been disclosed to patron prior to last day of trial. Thompson slipped and fell in a “puddle of yellowish-green liquid in a housewares aisle at Wal – Mart in Daytona Beach.”.

Bugay v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
First District. February 13, 1996 667 So.2d 957 1996
Appellant seeks review of an adverse summary final judgment entered in a slip-and-fall negligence case. Our review of the record satisfies us that genuine issues exist as to both the cause of appellant’s fall and whether a dangerous condition had existed for a sufficient period that appellee should have been aware of it.

O’Brien v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Second District. December 13, 1996 684 So.2d 306 1996
In this slip-and-fall action, the trial court granted final summary judgment in favor of Wal-Mart. We reverse. A defendant moving for summary judgment in a negligence case must show that there is no negligence or that the sole proximate cause of the injury was the negligence of the plaintiff. To establish that there was no negligence, Wal-mart must demonstrate that it owed no duty to Mrs. O’Brien or that it did not breach a duty which it owed.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Bufalo
Fourth District. August 24, 2005 909 So.2d 464 2005
As the appellee concedes, the lower court erred when it granted a new trial on damages alone, in this slip-and-fall case, without first granting a motion for additur. See Waxman v. Truman, 792 So.2d 657 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); §768.74, Fla. Stat. (2004). Before a new trial on damages can be awarded, section 768.74. As the appellee concedes, the lower court erred when it granted a new trial on damages alone, in this slip-and- fall case, without first granting a motion for additur.

Harper v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P.
Fifth District. March 14, 2014 134 So.3d 557 2014
Entry of summary judgment in defendant’s favor was premature in light of pending discovery sought by plaintiff. Harper fell at a Wal-Mart store, and subsequently brought a suit against Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Ballasso
First District. July 17, 2001 789 So.2d 519 2001
Retail store’s investigative files concerning slip-and-fall injury were privileged work product. It was foreseeable that litigation might ensue from slip-and- fall incident in retail store, and thus, store’s investigative files were prepared in anticipation of litigation and were privileged work product. Compelling production of retail store’s investigatory files concerning alleged slip-and- fall injury in store was not warranted, considering that store sufficiently alleged files were protected as work product, and plaintiffs failed to demonstrate their need for the files or show an undue hardship in acquiring equivalent information.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Coleman
Second District. November 03, 1999 745 So.2d 423 1999
Defendant was entitled to remittitur after jury misconceived court’s instructions and increased verdict. This case arises out of injuries Mrs. Coleman received when she slipped and fell in an apparent spill of liquid detergent while pushing a shopping cart down an aisle in the Wal-Mart store.

Hayes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Fourth District. June 07, 2006 933 So.2d 124 2006
Error in prohibiting cross-examination of experts concerning their reliance upon report in forming their opinions was harmless. She alleged that Wal- Mart knew of the condition or that it existed for a sufficient length of time that Wal- Mart should have known of it. It found that Hayes was 90% negligent and Wal- Mart was 10% negligent.

Disclaimer – These cases are being provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any way.  The law is constantly evolving, including being replaced or modified. Therefore, we urge you to speak with an experienced Florida personal injury lawyer about your case to learn about your rights.

Quick Facts:

Slip and falls are the second leading cause of injuries and deaths after car accidents. Every hour an older adult dies as a result of a fall. The most common injuries resulting from slip and falls include, herniated disc, head injury and/or a knee injury. Learn more from Alan Sackrin, an expert slip and fall lawyer.

Related Slip and Fall Topics

Please feel free to read our other slip and fall (trip and fall) related articles and fact sheets, including:

• 6 Environmental factors that can cause slip and fall accidents
• 4 Factors that determine the types of injuries from a slip and fall
• Slip and Fall Case Checklist
• Sample Slip and Fall Lawsuit

Do You Have a Question?

Please fill out the “Talk With Us” form above to ask a question or you can call Alan Sackrin at 954-458-8655.  He promises to get back to you promptly.  Ask now.

Learn More: See Our Slip and Fall Resource Page