Reference no: EM132307434

Harold Martin was shopping in the sporting goods department of a Wal Mart store. At that time, in the department there was only one employee when, according to the store’s policy, there should have been two. In front of the sporting goods section, in the store’s main aisle (which the employees referred to as “action alley”) was a large display of stacked cases of shotgun shells. On top of the cases were individual boxes of shells. Shortly after the sporting-goods employee walked past the display, Martin did so, but Martin slipped on some loose shotgun shell pellets and fell to the floor. Immediately, he lost feeling and control of his legs. Sensation and control returned, but during the next week, he lost the use of his legs several times for periods of from ten to fifteen minutes. Eventually, sensation and control did not return to the front half of his left foot. Doctors diagnosed the condition as permanent. Martin filed a suit in a federal district court against Wal-Mart, seeking damages for his injury. Should Wal-Mart be considered to have had notice of the condition that led to Martin’s injury? Why or why not?