Holly Averyt, a commercial truck driver, slipped in grease while making a delivery to Walmart store number 980 in Greeley, Colorado. As a result of the fall, Averyt ruptured a disc in her spine and injured her shoulder and neck. These injuries left her unable to perform many daily functions. Averyt sued Wal- Mart Stores, Inc. (Walmart), alleging claims for negligence and premises liability.
Averyt's attorney sought evidence from Walmart documenting the grease spill, but Walmart denied the existence of the grease spill and did not turn over documents to Averyt. During opening statements on the first day of trial, Walmart denied the existence of the grease spill. On that day, Averyt's attorney contacted the government of the City of Greeley and discovered a memorandum that referenced the grease spill and documentation of the cleanup of the spill. Averyt impeached a \Valmart \vitness's statements using the Greeley report.
The next morning, Walmart informed the court and Averyt that it had located an assistant manager who remembered the grease spill and disclosed numerous documents that confirmed the existence of the spill, including documents from three companies that were involved in cleaning up the spill. From that point forward, Walmart ceased to deny the existence of the grease spiU and instead asserted that it had exercised reasonable care to clean up the spill.
The jury found in Averyt's favor and awarded her $15 million in damages. The trial! court judge applied a legal cap on damages, reducing the award to approximately $11 million. Walmart made a motion for a new trial, alleging nondisclosure of the Greeley report by plaintiffs before being introduced at trial and unfair prejudice of the jury. The trial court granted Walmart's motion for a new trial. Averyt appealed.
Do you think that Walmart willfully did not disclose the evidence of the grease spill? Did the jury consider Walmart's conduct when it reached its verdict?