Passenger at LAX slips and falls in bathroom. $2 million. Los Angeles County.

Facts and Background

• Facts and Background:

  Plaintiff flew to Los Angeles with her 78-year-old mother to help care for her aunt for five days. After landing in Terminal 1 at LAX, they both walked toward the crowded women’s restroom within the concourse. Plaintiff and her mother queued in line to wait for open stalls. A woman walked out of the large stall at the end of the hallway and the door closed behind her.

  Plaintiff walked down the hallway, reached out with her left hand to open the door, simultaneously stepping with her right foot, and slipped on spilled coffee. She fell to the ground, landing on her back and left side. Her left leg went numb. A custodian walked up next to her, and without saying a word, placed  a "wet floor" sign next to her head and walked away.

  Plaintiff was on the floor for about five minutes before her mother was able to help her up and out of the bathroom to wait for airport police to arrive and take her statement. Later, plaintiff’s cousin took her to the ER where she was diagnosed with lumbar strain/sprain. Plaintiff's pain continued to worsen upon returning to Missouri, where she underwent physical therapy, injections, and ultimately surgery.

• Plaintiff's Contentions:

  That LAX employees created the dangerous condition by installing unsafe tile. LAX had refurbished this restroom in around 2009 or 2010. LAX's own PMK on tile admitted that LAX had a policy to have slip-resistant tile in restrooms, because liquid often gets on the floor either from leaky pipes or spills; that slip-resistant tile prevents injury. Yet, when measured by both plaintiff and defense experts, the friction coefficient of the tile was well below the threshold for safety.

  In response to defendant's contentions (below), plaintiff argued that she did fall and that her own testimony, the testimony of her mother, and the Incident Report all stated that she fell, her clothes were wet and she had visible injuries on her body following the incident. Further, plaintiff argued she could not have avoided the spill as the door to the stall was closed as she walked down the bathroom hallway, and because the bathroom was so busy, she could not see the path in front of her clearly until she had opened the stall door and stepped in, at which point it was too late.

  That  defendant's "bacteria" argument was a complete "red herring:"  any tile can be cleaned with the use of antibacterial cleaning agents. Whether the same tile was in different airport bathrooms had no relevance to this matter.

  As to causation, although plaintiff had pre-existing back issues, these were resolved by the time of her fall. Further, any pre-existing issues simply made her an eggshell plaintiff who was more susceptible to these serious injuries when falling.

• Defendant's Contentions:

  Defendant contended that (1) plaintiff was lying about slipping and falling in the restroom as there was no evidence of foot or body "tracking" marks through the liquid on the ground in photographs taken at the scene; (2) plaintiff should have avoided the spill by walking around it because it was open and obvious; (3) the tile installed in the restroom was safe enough because getting more slip-resistant tile would have promoted bacteria growth; (4) the tile was safe because defendant's expert has seen this tile in other airport restrooms; and (5) plaintiff had pre-existing conditions and injuries to her back, so this fall could not have caused all of her pain.