An 89-year-old woman thinks a fall at Wal-Mart entitles her to $2 million.
Anna Mae Elliot was shopping for clothes at a Midlothian Wal-Mart on August 31, 2009, when she put her hand on a clothing rack, which fell over, causing her to fall, according to a suit filed in circuit court in Richmond. The rack got tangled in her foot and caused her to fall, the suit claims.
Elliot is suing the Midlothian Wal-Mart for $2 million dollars.
According to Wal-Mart representatives, the fated rack was not a permanent clothing rack, but a transportation rack for moving clothing from rack to rack or from the stock room, and not for customer use.
Elliot’s lawyer, Elliot M. Buckner, of Cantor Stoneburner Ford Grana and Buckner, is arguing that the Wal-Mart manager and employees “Failed to use ordinary care to have the store in a reasonably safe condition for Plaintiff’s use.”
Buckner claims in the suit that Elliot sustained “significant injuries and damages,” including “physical pain and mental anguish, past, present, and that which she may be reasonably expected to suffer in the future; medical expenses; humiliation and/or embarrassment” as well as others.
Buckner did not return calls seeking comment.
Kaitlin Mayhew is a BizSense reporter. Please send news tips to [email protected].
An 89-year-old woman thinks a fall at Wal-Mart entitles her to $2 million.
Anna Mae Elliot was shopping for clothes at a Midlothian Wal-Mart on August 31, 2009, when she put her hand on a clothing rack, which fell over, causing her to fall, according to a suit filed in circuit court in Richmond. The rack got tangled in her foot and caused her to fall, the suit claims.
Elliot is suing the Midlothian Wal-Mart for $2 million dollars.
According to Wal-Mart representatives, the fated rack was not a permanent clothing rack, but a transportation rack for moving clothing from rack to rack or from the stock room, and not for customer use.
Elliot’s lawyer, Elliot M. Buckner, of Cantor Stoneburner Ford Grana and Buckner, is arguing that the Wal-Mart manager and employees “Failed to use ordinary care to have the store in a reasonably safe condition for Plaintiff’s use.”
Buckner claims in the suit that Elliot sustained “significant injuries and damages,” including “physical pain and mental anguish, past, present, and that which she may be reasonably expected to suffer in the future; medical expenses; humiliation and/or embarrassment” as well as others.
Buckner did not return calls seeking comment.
Kaitlin Mayhew is a BizSense reporter. Please send news tips to [email protected].
This is what is wrong with America, I am personal scared to go into public because I am constantly afraid someone is going to sue me for looking at them wrong or bumping into them my mistake. People are just looking for a free ride in life, what happen to working for a buck and earning what you deserve and not just sueing to get what you think you deserve.
Let us know how that lawsuit turns out. If she wins, I am going to my local retailer and pull a couple of racks on top of me. Joking aside. I hope that if she loses she will have to pay for damages to Wal-mart’s reputation that she blemished.
So at 89 years old how would she be awarded $2 million, awards should be bases on their loss of income. If she needed a coat rack to support her then shouldn’t she have been using a walker. So isn’t she negligent for not using one. We need tort reform but the the foxes(Lawyers) are the ones watch the the hen house(making the laws or in this case not making the laws).
The sue happy country we live in today is more the result of scumbag, greedy lawyers taking and pursuing cases like this one and asking for large sums of money for an everyday accident.
There needs to be a middle ground. We all have an expectation of safety and freedom from harm where we shop and do business. At the same time, an 89 year old is likely to fall for the slightest reason, and it would be impossible to design a world to such a standard. I think the damages should be on the order of a few hundred dollars to cover an insurance co-pays for the fall – and she should be made to pay Wal mart for any inventory she damaged by draggin their rack to the floor. Net – net… Read more »
Her lawyers must be drooling all over themselves with glee…..Wal-Mart!!! I’m sorry the woman was hurt, but I hope she loses, and wishful thinking, her attorneys forced to pay Wal-Mart for its court costs.
Hypothetical situation.
What happens in a law suit like this if she were to die. Not from the fall but because she is 89 years old. Does the estate still have the right to sue?
You mean her foot got tangled in the rack, not the rack got tangled in her foot. This is just SOP for personal injury attorneys. They don’t want the case to go to court; they just want to settle for a good amount since they get 33.33 percent of it, and the doctors they use are getting compensation for all the unnecessary “heating pad treatments” the lawyer instructed his client to get. If they ask for $2 mil going in, they’re hoping Wal-Mart will settle out of court for a higher amount than just the woman’s trumped up medical expenses… Read more »
I have been on several juries that dealt with “accident ” cases and they all went against the Plaintiff. The jurors were thoughtful and didn’t let the wool get pulled over their eyes. Of course the devil is in the details, but if I were Wal-Mart the most I would offer is to pay is for incidental medical expenses.
In the real world the “pain and suffering” that the 89 year old women is likely to encounter before and during a trial could be more than she actually suffered in the “accident.”
A hot cup of coffee anyone ?
I agree…this is what is wrong with America. As long as our legal system allows such frivilous lawsuits people like this will keep looking to get rich on the backs of others. Who do you think ultimately pays????