In a slip and fall case, the plaintiff usually claims that the defendant did not take adequate precautions to warn the plaintiff of the dangerous situation that caused the plaintiff's injury.

But when does a property owner have a duty to warn a person and when should common sense dictate that the person realize on his or her own that there are dangerous conditions ahead?

Before answering that question, New York residents should consider the following story. A woman has filed a slip and fall lawsuit against discount giant Wal-Mart after she fell and hurt herself in a store in 2009.

The woman claims that she was walking towards an employee whom she admittedly saw mopping the floor. The woman said she was under the impression that the employee was just cleaning up a spill because she did not see any 'Wet Floor' signs around. She said she slowed her pace of walking but did not change her route.

The employee was actually cleaning up the entire floor, as opposed to just cleaning up an isolated spill, so the whole area of the floor was wet. The woman slipped and landed on her knee, which was badly hurt as a result.

The woman's case is currently in discovery (meaning lawyers for both the defendant and plaintiff are sharing information, as they are required to do, so each can prepare adequately for trial) and will go before a judge in August or so.

Obviously, the case will be decided at that time and after all the facts are known. But based on what we know so far, do you think this woman has a legitimate claim or should she have known better and so her injury is her own fault?

Source: The Southeast Texas Record, "August trial slated in slip & fall against Wal-Mart," David Yates, Jan. 20, 2012