George Ward entered a K-Mart department store in Champaign, Illinois, through a service entrance near the home improvements department. After purchasing a large mirror, Ward left the store through the same door. On his way out the door, carrying the mirror in front and somewhat to the side of him, he collided with a concrete pole located just outside the door about a foot and a half from the door and the outside wall. The mirror broke, and the broken glass cut his right cheek and eye, resulting in reduced vision in that eye, he testified that he had not seen the pole, had not realized what was happening, and only knew that he felt “a bad pain, and then saw stars.” Ward sued KMart Corp. for damages, alleging that the store was negligent. Ward’s case was built upon the assertion that the pole posed a foreseeable risk of harm to K-Mart’s customers and that K-Mart should have guarded against the risk. K-Mart argued that the pole was such an obvious obstacle that it did not pose any risk, and therefore no warning or other safeguard was needed. The trial court ruled in Ward’s favor and he was awarded $68,000 in damages. K Mart appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court. How should the appellate court rule? Should K-Mart’s duty of care extend to customers’ injuries of this type? Was this injury foreseeable to K-Mart? What was the proximate cause of Ward’s injury? Discuss each of these questions and the relevant issues involved in this case.