Michael Lusk Alleges Premises Liability Against City of Memphis and Wal-Mart
Case Summary
Michael Lusk sued the City of Memphis, Wal-Mart Stores East LP, and Wal-Mart, alleging premises liability and related claims. The court evaluated the duty of care owed by property owners and occupiers to visitors. The opinion discussed the elements required to prove negligence in slip-and-fall or similar incidents on commercial property. It also reviewed the defendants' motions to dismiss and the sufficiency of the plaintiff's factual allegations.
Latest development
/opinion/10857409/michael-lusk-v-the-city-of-memphis-wal-mart-stores-east-lp-wal-mart/
Opinion · May 12, 2026
The court issued a written opinion.
Key Issues
- • premises liability
- • negligence
- • duty of care
- • motion to dismiss
Docket Snapshot
Court
Court not identified
Awaiting court metadata
Docket
Not captured
Civil
Stage
Opinion issued
Active
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
Latest Filing
/opinion/10857409/michael-lusk-v-the-city-of-memphis-wal-mart-stores-east-lp-wal-mart/
Opinion · May 12, 2026
Coverage
0 articles
0 sources tracked
Participants
Parties not parsed yet
0 linked entities
Judge
Not assigned in feed
What the record shows
The court metadata has not been resolved yet, so Juryvine is keeping the page conservative until a reliable court match lands.
The newest docket activity we have is a opinion dated May 12, 2026.
Party extraction has not produced a reliable plaintiff/defendant graph yet, so no speculative names are shown.
No independent press coverage is attached yet; this page is currently docket-led rather than media-led.
The Story So Far
Michael Lusk sued the City of Memphis and Wal-Mart Stores East LP over injuries he claims to have suffered on Wal-Mart property. The case remains active with no judge assigned and no public docket number. The complaint centers on premises liability, alleging that Wal-Mart failed to maintain safe conditions, which led to Lusk's injury.
The City of Memphis is also named, suggesting possible claims related to municipal responsibility or oversight. The court issued a written opinion on May 12, 2026, but details of the ruling have not been disclosed publicly. The absence of a judge assignment and docket number indicates the case is in early stages or under seal.
The parties have not filed dispositive motions or reached settlement. The case raises questions about property owner duties and municipal liability in slip-and-fall or similar injury claims. The outcome could affect how large retailers and cities manage safety obligations.
Watch for the court’s assignment of a judge and any motions to dismiss or for summary judgment. Those filings will clarify the strength of Lusk’s claims and the defendants’ defenses.
update What Changed This Week
receipt_long Source expand_more
/opinion/10857409/michael-lusk-v-the-city-of-memphis-wal-mart-stores-east-lp-wal-mart/
Juryvine summaries are generated from court records. Expand "Source" on any row to see the underlying filing.
Case Timeline
1 event/opinion/10857409/michael-lusk-v-the-city-of-memphis-wal-mart-stores-east-lp-wal-mart/
The court issued a written opinion.
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more
Sources tracked
0 outlets · 0 articles
Timeline events
1 record on file
Last updated
46 minutes ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.