Alesia Martin v. Our Lady of the Lake, Inc. dba Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center and ABC Insurance Company

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

ALEISA MARTIN NO. 2026 CW 0002

VERSUS PAGE 1 OF 2

OUR LADY OF THE LAKE, INC.

DBA OUR LADY OF THE LAKE

REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AND AUGUST 21, 2026
ABC INSURANCE COMPANY

In Re: Our Lady of the Lake, Inc., D/B/A Our Lady of the Lake
Regional Medical Center ("OLOL"), applying for
supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish
of East Baton Rouge, No. 734023.

BEFORE : HESTER, MILLER, EDWARDS, BALFOUR, AND FIELDS, Ju.

WRIT GRANTED. The trial court’s October 6, 2025 judgment,
which denied the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant,
Our Lady of Lake, Inc., d/b/a Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical
Center, is reversed. A plaintiff must prove a condition presented
an unreasonable risk of harm, the defendant had actual or
constructive knowledge of the risk, and it failed to exercise
reasonable care. See Woods v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 2022-0191
(La. App. Ist Cir. 9/16/22), 353 So.3d 182. A plaintiff must make
a positive showing of the existence of the condition prior to the
fall. See Cyprian v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 2016-0717 (La.
App. ist Cir. 2/17/17), 2017 WL 658246, *3 (unpublished) (citing
White v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 97-0393 (La. 9/9/97), 699 So.2d
1081, 1084). A defendant does not have to make a positive showing
of the absence of the existence of the condition prior to the fall.
See White, 699 So.2d at 1084. “Notwithstanding that such would
require proving a negative, the [law] simply does not provide for
a shifting of the burden.” Id. In her petition for damages,
plaintiff, Aleisa Martin, alleged she fell in defendant’s hospital
due to a sticky substance left on the floor without any indication
or warning of the dangerous conditions of the area. However,
plaintiff testified during her deposition that she did not observe
any sticky substance on the floor, she did not look down at the
floor after her fall, and she could not testify to a difference in
the flooring where she fell and the surrounding area. Plaintiff
provided no other evidence that her shoe had gotten stuck on a
substance on the floor, causing her to fall. Moreover, the security
supervisor testified to arriving at the scene, inspecting the floor
where plaintiff fell, and finding no liquid or sticky substance on
the floor.

Additionally, constructive notice exists when the defect or
condition has existed for such a period of time that it would have
been discovered and remedied had the custodian exercised
reasonable care. See Racca v. St. Mary Sugar Cooperative, Inc.,
2002-1766 (La. App. lst Cir. 2/23/04), 872 So.2d 1117, 1126, writ
denied, 2004-0698 (La. 5/7/04), 872 So.2d 1083. The claimant who
simply shows the condition existed without an additional showing
that the condition existed for some time before the fall has not
carried the burden of proving constructive notice. White, 699 So.2d
1081. Plaintiff testified that she was uncertain about the length
of time the purported substance was on the floor and provided no

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

NO. 2026 CW 0002

PAGE 2 OF 2

evidence regarding whether the substance was actually on the floor.
Furthermore, neither plaintiff nor the security supervisor on duty
could testify to defendant having constructive notice of a
substance on the floor at the time of plaintiff’s fall.

We find plaintiff failed to meet her burden to produce factual
support to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to either of
these elements. Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment is
granted, and the claims of plaintiff, Aleisa Martin, against
defendant, Our Lady of Lake, Inc., d/b/a Our Lady of the Lake
Regional Medical Center, are dismissed with prejudice.

CHH
SMM
BDE
KEB

Fields, J., dissents and would deny the writ.

{ Xourt OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
h \

/

5 YOkno

KPUTY CLERK OF COURT
| FOR THE COURT