Adams v. Nathaniel Rose & Pinnacle Entm't
| Docket Number | 23-CA-119 |
| Decision Date | 27 December 2023 |
| Parties | GWENDOLYN ADAMS v. NATHANIEL ROSE AND PINNACLE ENTERTAINMENT, INC., D/B/A BOOMTOWN CASINO &HOTEL NEW ORLEANS |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
1
GWENDOLYN ADAMS
v.
NATHANIEL ROSE AND PINNACLE ENTERTAINMENT, INC., D/B/A BOOMTOWN CASINO &HOTEL NEW ORLEANS
No. 23-CA-119
Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit
December 27, 2023
ON APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 803-473, DIVISION "D" HONORABLE SCOTT U.SCHLEGEL, JUDGE PRESIDING
Panel composed of Judges Fredericka Homberg Wicker, Jude G. Gravois, and Marc E. Johnson
REVERSED AND REMANDED
FHW
JGG
MEJ
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT,
GWENDOLYN ADAMS
Jake J. Weinstock
Irvy E. Cosse, III
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE,
LOUISIANA-1 GAMING, A LOUISIANA PARTNERSHIP-IN-COMMENDAM
D. Russell Holwadel
Kyle M. Truxillo
FREDERICKA HOMBERG WICKER JUDGE
Plaintiff, Gwendolyn Adams, appeals the trial court's summary judgment in favor of Defendant, Louisiana Gaming-1 d/b/a Boomtown Casino &Hotel New Orleans. Because we find that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether Defendant negligently breached a duty to provide sufficient security for casino patrons in its exterior parking lot, we reverse the trial court judgment and remand this matter to the trial court for further proceedings.
Factual and Procedural Background
On January 24, 2020, Plaintiff filed suit in the 24th Judicial District Court against Defendant[1] and Nathaniel Rose for personal injuries arising out of a February 22, 2019 purse snatching incident that occurred when Mr. Rose stole Plaintiff's purse while she walked through the Boomtown Casino parking lot. Plaintiff alleged that, as a result of Mr. Rose's actions, she sustained personal injuries, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of wages, and other damages. Plaintiff further alleged that Defendant was negligent in failing to take necessary measures to protect the safety of business invitees by failing to properly maintain, inspect, and supervise in and around the casino's premises.
After initial discovery, on September 14, 2022, Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, contending that it owed no duty to protect Plaintiff from a third-party, Mr. Rose's, criminal actions. In its motion for summary judgment, Defendant recognized its duty to provide a reasonably safe premises for its patrons, but asserted that it met its duty through taking affirmative steps to provide its own security personnel, in addition to contracting with Jefferson Parish to ensure that Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office (JPSO) detail officers would also be present in the
parking lot each night. Defendant contended that summary judgment was appropriate, and that Plaintiff could not meet her burden to prove that Defendant breached its duty to Plaintiff under the facts of this case.
In support of its motion for summary judgment, Defendant attached Plaintiff's deposition testimony. In her deposition, Plaintiff testified that on February 22, 2019, she arrived to Boomtown Casino between 7:00 p.m. and 7:15 p.m.[2] After she parked and exited her vehicle in the parking lot, she began walking toward the casino entrance. She stated that as she passed a champagne-colored older model SUV, she recalled a man came from behind her and said, "Give me that purse," to which plaintiff responded, "No." She testified that she carried her purse on her shoulder and that the man grabbed the purse, breaking the strap, and pushed her to the ground. She testified that another patron, who had passed her in the parking lot, offered to find security to report the incident.
Plaintiff testified that she had visited Boomtown Casino on numerous occasions before this incident. She testified that she was aware that the casino offered a complimentary valet service; however, she stated that on that night, she had circled the parking lot several times looking for a valet available and found that "there was nobody there." She further testified that, in each of her prior visits to the casino, she had observed a security vehicle with flashing lights patrolling the parking lot. On the night in question, however, she observed no security patrolling the parking lot, and no valet or other employees were present.
To support its motion for summary judgment, Defendant attached its discovery responses, which set forth various security measures Defendant had put in place pertaining to the casino's exterior parking lot, specifically:
Defendant retained on-duty JPSO deputies to conduct routine patrols and monitoring of its parking lots. Defendant's security personnel similar[ly] conducted patrols and monitoring of its parking lots, both
on foot and on a mobile unit. Further, at the time of the Subject Incident, Defendant had in place a police-grade mobile watchtower, which was situated at various locations in the Boomtown parking lot, as well as extensive overhead lighting and caution/warning signs.
Moreover, there were security cameras installed throughout Boomtown's parking lot, and access thereto was limited to a single entrance/exit, monitored by cameras/license plate readers, with the premises further encircled by fencing/seawalls and natural barriers, including the Harvey Canal.
In further support of its motion for summary judgment, Defendant attached the deposition testimony of the assistant security manager, Allean Edwards. Ms. Edwards testified that she had been the assistant security manager at Boomtown Casino for approximately 26 years. In her 26 years, she stated that Plaintiff's incident was the first purse snatching or mugging that she could recall having occurred in the casino parking lot.
Ms. Edwards testified that, on the night in question, she did not witness the crime but, rather, was subsequently informed by the valet supervisor that it had occurred. She met Plaintiff in the parking lot and took her statement.[3] Ms. Edwards stated that JPSO was subsequently called and arrived on the premises at approximately 7:35 p.m.
Concerning her regular duties at the time of the incident, Ms. Edwards testified that she was primarily stationed in the interior of the casino, but that, occasionally if it became necessary, she would drive the mobile unit-a vehicle with lights activated-and patrol the parking lot. She testified that a security employee would generally patrol the parking lot in the mobile unit, but she could not "recall that particular night" whether a security employee had patrolled in the mobile unit. The casino's written policies and procedures, which were attached to Defendant's motion for summary judgment, called for Boomtown Casino's
security employees stationed in the "Mobile Unit" to "conduct continuous patrols of all parking areas and administrative building areas."
Ms. Edwards also discussed the "sky tower," a large surveillance unit where security employees would sit and observe the entire exterior area of the premises. She testified that generally someone was stationed in the tower each day, unless the casino had a staffing shortage. She further testified that the sky tower was physically present on the night of the incident but could not recall whether any employee had been stationed in the tower. Ms. Edwards testified that Austin Johnson, the security manager on the date of the incident, would have possession of security "logs" to show which employees were stationed in the sky tower on a particular night.
Mr. Johnson, Boomtown Casino's security manager, testified that he was employed as a security assistant manager at the time of the incident but was promoted to manager after the previous manager retired. He testified that Defendant has a contract with JPSO to provide a "nightly" security detail on the premises, 365 nights a year.[4] He testified that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial