Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019465979

Filing Date: 02/01/2023 03:27:21 PM CST


Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019465979

Filing Date: 02/01/2023 03:27:21 PM CST

Image ID:

D00252216D59 Doc. No. 252216

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Sarpy COUNTY, NEBRASKA

Sarpy County Courthouse

1210 Golden Gate Dr, Ste 3141

Papillion NE 68046 3087

Maureen Barrett v. Walmart, Inc.

Case ID: CI 23 223

TO: Walmart, Inc.

You have been sued by the following plaintiff(s):

Maureen Barrett

Plaintiff's Attorney: Steven M Lathrop

Address: 1005 South 107th Avenue Ste 200

Omaha, NE 68114

Telephone: (402) 390-9000

A copy of the complaint/petition is attached. To defend this lawsuit, an

appropriate response must be served on the parties and filed with the office of

the clerk of the court within 30 days of service of the complaint/petition. If

you fail to respond, the court may enter judgment for the relief demanded in the

complaint/petition.

Nebraska Supreme Court Rule 2-208 requires individuals involved in a case who

are not attorneys and representing themselves to provide their email address to

the court in order to receive notice by email from the court about the case.

Complete and return the attached form to the court if representing yourself.

Date: FEBRUARY 2, 2023 BY THE COURT:

Clerk

Page 1 of 2
Image ID:

D00252216D59 Doc. No. 252216

PLAINTIFF'S DIRECTIONS FOR SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND A COPY OF THE

COMPLAINT/PETITION ON:

Walmart, Inc.

CT Corporation System, reg agent

5601 S. 59th Street Suite C

Lincoln, NE 68516

Method of service: Certified Mail

You are directed to make such service within ten days after the date of issue,

and file with the court clerk proof of service within ten days after the signed

receipt is received or is available electronically, whichever occurs first.

Page 2 of 2
Doc. No. 252216

SARPY COUNTY DISTRICT COURT

Sarpy County Courthouse

1210 Golden Gate Dr, Ste 3141

Papillion NE 68046 3087

To:

Case ID: CI 23 223 Maureen Barrett v. Walmart, Inc.

To: Walmart, Inc. From: Steven M Lathrop

CT Corporation System, reg agent 1005 South 107th Avenue Ste 200

5601 S. 59th Street Suite C Omaha, NE 68114

Lincoln, NE 68516
Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019496179

Filing Date: 02/08/2023 12:06:43 PM CST
Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Wednesday, February 08, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of

the Return-Summons/Alias Summons to the following:

 Signature: /s/ Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602)
1 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA 

MAUREEN BARRETT, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

WALMART, INC., 

Defendant. 

Case No. CI 23-223 

JOINT MOTION FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S 

COMPLAINT 

Plaintiff Maureen Barrett and Defendant Walmart, Inc. jointly move the 

Court for an extension of time for Defendant to answer or otherwise respond to 

the Plaintiff’s Complaint until on or before April 7, 2023. 

In support of this Motion, the Parties state Plaintiff served with Summons 

and a copy of the Complaint on February 6, 2023, that Defendant’s initial answer 

date is March 8, 2023. Therefore, this Motion is within the time originally 

allotted for Defendant’s response. Furthermore, counsel for the Parties have 

discussed Plaintiff’s intention to amend the Complaint, and the Parties agree that 

extending the time for Defendant to respond to the Complaint is in the best 

interests of the Parties, as it should allow sufficient time for Plaintiff to amend her 

Complaint. 

Dated this 7th day of March, 2023. 

Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019616484

Filing Date: 03/07/2023 04:38:04 PM CST
2 

 MAUREEN BARRETT, Plaintiff, 

By: /s/ Kyle J. McGinn 

Kyle J. McGinn (NE# 25696) 

HAUPTMAN, O’BRIEN, WOLF & 

LATHROP, P.C. 

1005 South 107th Avenue, Suite 200 

Omaha, NE 68114 

Phone: 402-390-9000 

Facsimile: 402-397-7915 

Email: 

kmcginn@omahaperosnalinjury.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff

 WALMART INC., Defendant, 

By: /s/ Mark J. Goldsmith 

Mark J. Goldsmith (NE# 26429) 

BAIRD HOLM LLP 

1700 Farnam St, Ste 1500 

Omaha, NE 68102-2068 

Phone: 402-344-0500 

Facsimile: 402-344-0588 

Email: mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com 

Attorney for Defendant

DOCS/2938364.1 
Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Wednesday, March 08, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of

the Motion-Additional Time to the following:

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Signature: /s/ MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429)
1 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA 

MAUREEN BARRETT, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

WALMART, INC., 

Defendant. 

Case No. CI 23-223 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT 

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF 

TIME TO RESPOND TO 

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT 

 Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint is 

granted. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED that Defendant, Walmart, Inc. has until on or 

before April 7, 2023 to file its Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint or otherwise plead. 

 DATED this ___ day of March, 2023. 

 

 

 District Court Judge 

Prepared and submitted by: 

Mark J. Goldsmith (NE#26429) 

Baird Holm LLP 

1700 Farnam Street, Ste. 1500 

Omaha, NE 68102 

402.344.0500 

Attorney for Defendant 

DOCS/2939566.1  

14th

Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019619666

Filing Date: 03/14/2023 03:05:52 PM CDT
I, the undersigned, certify that on March 14, 2023 , I served a copy of the foregoing

document upon the following persons at the addresses given, by mailing by United States Mail,

postage prepaid, or via E-mail:

Mark J Goldsmith Steven M Lathrop

mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com slathrop@hauptman-obrien.net

Date: March 14, 2023 BY THE COURT: _____________________________________

CLERK
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA 

MAUREEN BARRETT, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

WALMART, INC., , 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. CI 23-223 

DEFENDANT WALMART 

INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

 Defendant Walmart, Inc. (hereinafter “Walmart”), by and through its 

undersigned counsel, hereby submits this Motion to Dismiss pursuant to NEB. CT.

R. PLDG. § 6-1112(b)(6) and § 6-1108(a) because the Plaintiff Maureen Barrett 

(hereinafter “Plaintiff”) has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be 

granted against Walmart. In support of this Motion, Walmart submits the 

following: 

1. The Complaint alleges that on or about December 10, 2022, Ms. Barrett 

visited the Walmart store located in Papillion, Sarpy County, Nebraska (“the 

Store”). (Complaint at ¶ 6). 

2. Ms. Barrett claims that, while in the store, she was “struck” or “nearly 

struck” by a Walmart associate. (Id. ¶ 7) Ms. Barrett contends that the “collision 

or near collision” was the result of Walmart’s alleged negligence (Id. at ¶ 8) and 

that, as a result, she sustained alleged personal injuries (Id. at ¶ 9). 

3. Ms. Barrett alleges in her Complaint that she “incurred medical expenses 

in the care and treatment of her injuries,” resulting from the collision or near 

collision. (Id. at ¶ 10; see also Id. at ¶ 11 re: prayer for “special and general 

damages”) 

4. Nebraska Pleading Rule § 6-1108(a) provides that “[i]f the recovery of 

Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019757908

Filing Date: 04/07/2023 10:07:01 AM CDT
money be demanded” in a complaint, “the amount of special damages shall be 

stated[.]” 

5. In violation of this requirement, the Complaint does not list the special 

damages the Plaintiff is seeking. 

6. Under Nebraska law, medical expenses are a category of special damages. 

7. The Plaintiff should be required to file an Amended Complaint that 

complies with § 6-1108(a). 

 WHEREFORE, Defendant Walmart Inc. prays for an order dismissing the 

Complaint, and/or requiring Ms. Barrett to file an Amended Complaint that fully 

complies with NEB. CT. R. PLDG. § 6-1108(a). 

Dated this 7th day of April, 2023. 

WALMART INC., Defendant, 

By: /s/ Mark J. Goldsmith 

Mark J. Goldsmith (NE #26429) 

George E. Martin III (NE #21747) 

 Of BAIRD HOLM LLP 

1500 Woodmen Tower 

1700 Farnam Street 

Omaha, NE 68102-2068 

Phone: 402-344-0500 

mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com 

gemartin@bairdholm.com 

NOTICE OF HEARING 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the above Motion will be called for hearing 

before the Honorable Michael A. Smith, District Judge, Sarpy County, Nebraska 

on the 9th day of May, 2023 at 11:00 a.m. or as soon thereafter as counsel may be 

heard. 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on April 7, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing 

with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send 

notification of such filing to counsel of record: 

Steven M. Lathrop 

Kyle J. McGinn 

Hauptman, O’Brien, Wolf & Lathrop, PC 

1004 South 107th Avenue, Suite 200 

Omaha, NE 68114 

slathrop@omahapersonalinjury.com 

kmcginn@omahapersonalinjury.com

 /s/Mark J. Goldsmith 

DOCS/2951869.1 
Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Friday, April 07, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the

Motion-Dismissal to the following:

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Signature: /s/ MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429)
1 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA 

MAUREEN BARRETT, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

WALMART, INC., , 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. CI 23-223 

DEFENDANT WALMART 

INC.’S BRIEF IN SUPPORT 

OF MOTION TO DISMISS 

 The Defendant, Walmart, Inc. (hereinafter “Walmart”), submits this brief 

in support of its Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”). The Court should grant the 

Motion because Plaintiff Maureen Barrett’s (“Barrett”) complaint does not 

comply with Nebraska Pleading Rule § 6-1108(a); it fails to specify the dollar 

amount of her alleged special damages. 

I. Pertinent Pleaded Allegations

 Ms. Barrett alleges that on December 10, 2022, she visited the Walmart 

store located in Papillion, Nebraska. (Complaint at ¶ 6) Ms. Barrett claims that, 

while in the store, she was “struck” or “nearly struck” by a Walmart associate. 

(Id. ¶ 7) Ms. Barrett contends that the “collision or near collision” was the result 

of Walmart’s alleged negligence (Id. at ¶ 8) and that, as a result, she sustained 

alleged personal injuries (Id. at ¶ 9). 

 Ms. Barrett alleges in her Complaint that she “incurred medical expenses 

in the care and treatment of her injuries,” resulting from the collision or near 

collision. (Id. at ¶ 10; see also Id. at ¶ 11 re: prayer for “special and general 

damages”) The Complaint, however fails to specify the amount of medical 

damages she is seeking. (Id., gen’ly) 

II. Legal Standard 

Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019757908

Filing Date: 04/07/2023 10:07:01 AM CDT
2 

 At the motion to dismiss stage, the court “accepts as true all facts which 

are well pled and the proper and reasonable inferences of law and fact which may 

be drawn therefrom, but not the plaintiff’s conclusion.” Peterson v. Kings Gate 

Partners-Omaha I, L.P., 290 Neb. 658, 660 (2015). “To prevail against a motion 

to dismiss for failure to state a claim, a plaintiff must allege sufficient facts, 

accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 660-

61. 

A complaint may also be dismissed where it fails to comply with the 

Nebraska Pleading Rules. See Stunkel v. Cty. of Dawson, 2020 WL 7213501, *8 

(Neb. App. 2020) (unpublished) (affirming order “dismissing the operative 

complaint under the pleading rules”). 

III. Argument

 

 The Court should grant the Motion, because Ms. Barrett was required to 

plead the amount of her special damages in her Complaint, and she failed to do 

so. 

Nebraska Pleading Rule § 6-1108(a) provides that “[i]f the recovery of 

money be demanded” in a complaint, “the amount of special damages shall be 

stated[.]” In turn, “special damages” are “those suffered by a claimant because 

they are out-of-pocket damages.” Hatcher v. McShane, 12 Neb. App. 239, 245-46 

(2003). Stated differently, “[s]pecial damages are those capable of accurate 

determination by some means other than the opinion of the judge or jury.” Id. at 

246. 

Under Nebraska law, medical expenses are a form of special damages. In 

Stephens v. Pillen, 12 Neb. App. 600 (2004), for example, the court held that 

“medical expenses” are a form of “special damages” that “would require specific 

proof to be awarded.” Id. at 608. Other cases confirm the same point. E.g., 

Schneider v. Chavez-Munoz, 9 Neb. App. 579, 592 (2000) (assessing jury award 

of “special damages for medical expenses”); Schaefer v. McCreary, 216 Neb. 

739, 742 (1984) (holding that the plaintiff’s “medical expenses to date of trial” 

were part of the “special damages” he received). 
3 

Thus, Rule § 6-1108(a) requires Ms. Barrett to specify, in her Complaint, the 

dollar amount of her alleged medical expenses. Because the Complaint fails to do 

so, the Court should grant the Motion and dismiss the Complaint and/or require 

Ms. Barrett to file an amended complaint that specifies the amount of her medical 

expenses.

Dated this 7th day of April, 2023. 

WALMART INC., Defendant, 

By: /s/ Mark J. Goldsmith 

Mark J. Goldsmith (NE #26429) 

George E. Martin III (NE# 21747) 

 Of BAIRD HOLM LLP 

1500 Woodmen Tower 

1700 Farnam Street 

Omaha, NE 68102-2068 

Phone: 402-344-0500 

gemartin@bairdholm.com 

mroccaforte@bairdholm.com 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on April 7, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing 

with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send 

notification of such filing to counsel of record: 

Steven M. Lathrop 

Kyle J. McGinn 

Hauptman, O’Brien, Wolf & Lathrop, PC 

1004 South 107th Avenue, Suite 200 

Omaha, NE 68114 

slathrop@omahapersonalinjury.com 

kmcginn@omahapersonalinjury.com

 /s/Mark J. Goldsmith 
Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Friday, April 07, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the Brief

to the following:

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Signature: /s/ MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429)
Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019788636

Filing Date: 04/14/2023 11:58:27 AM CDT
Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Friday, April 14, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the

Notice-Serving Documents to the following:

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Walmart, Inc. represented by MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429) service

method: Electronic Service to mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com

 Signature: /s/ Kyle McGinn (Bar Number: 25696)
Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019889779

Filing Date: 05/08/2023 01:12:49 PM CDT



Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Monday, May 08, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the

Motion-Leave to File Additional Pleadings to the following:

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Walmart, Inc. represented by MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429) service

method: Electronic Service to mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com

 Signature: /s/ Kyle McGinn (Bar Number: 25696)
Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019890304

Filing Date: 05/08/2023 01:57:07 PM CDT
Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Monday, May 08, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the

Notice-Hearing to the following:

 Walmart, Inc. represented by MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429) service

method: Electronic Service to mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Signature: /s/ Kyle McGinn (Bar Number: 25696)
1 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA 

MAUREEN BARRETT, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

WALMART, INC., 

Defendant. 

Case No. CI 23-223 

JOINT MOTION FOR 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 

ORDER

 Plaintiff Maureen Barrett and Defendant Walmart, Inc. (the 

“Parties”) jointly move this Court for entry of a Stipulated Protective 

Order (attached hereto as Exhibit A). In support of this Motion, the 

Parties state that they will need to exchange confidential documents in 

support of their respective positions that are confidential, proprietary, 

or trade secrets and/or may contain medical or employee information. 

The Parties wish to stipulate to a protective order to protect any such 

confidential information. 

 WHEREFORE, the Parties request that the Court enter the 

Stipulated Protective Order, attached hereto as Exhibit A. 

 

Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019898015

Filing Date: 05/09/2023 02:29:07 PM CDT
2 

Dated this 9th day of May 2023. 

MAUREEN BARRETT, Plaintiff, 

By: _/s/ Kyle J. McGinn_________ 

 Kyle J. McGinn (NE# 25696) 

 Hauptman, O’Brien, Wolf & 

 Lathrop, P.C. 

 1005 S 107th Ave, Ste 200 

 Omaha, NE 68114 

 Phone: 402-390-9000 

 Facsimile:: 402-397-7915 

Email: 

kmcginn@omahapersonalinjury.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

WALMART, INC., Defendant, 

By: /s/Mark J. Goldsmith 

Mark J. Goldsmith (NE# 

26429) 

George E. Martin, III (NE# 

21747) 

BAIRD HOLM LLP 

1700 Farnam St, Ste 1500 

Omaha, NE 68102-2068 

Phone: 402-344-0500 

Facsimile: 402-344-0588 

Email: mgoldsmith@bairdholm.co 

 gmartin@bairdholm.com 

Attorney for Defendant 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that I filed the foregoing document electronically with 

the Sarpy County District Court via the Nebraska.gov e-filing System 

this 9th day of May 2023, which sent electronic notification of such 

filing to: 

Kyle J. McGinn – kmcginn@omahapersonalinjury.com 

 /s/ Mark J. Goldsmith 

DOCS/2969758.2 
Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Tuesday, May 09, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the

Motion to the following:

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Kyle McGinn (Bar Number: 25696) service method:

Electronic Service to kmcginn@hauptman-obrien.net

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Signature: /s/ MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429)
Image ID: D00257880D59

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA

Maureen Barrett v. Walmart, Inc. Printed on 5/09/2023 at 3:44

Room 59D07

Case ID: CI 23 223 Page 1

Decision Date 5/09/2023

================================================================================================

A P P E A R A N C E S

Judge Michael A Smith Appeared

Defendant Walmart, Inc. Did NOT Appear

Counsel Mark J Goldsmith Appeared

Plaintiff Maureen Barrett Did NOT Appear

Counsel Kyle J McGinn Appeared

A D D I T I O N A L E N T R I E S OF R E C O R D

Hearing held. Order to enter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Hon. 5/09/2023 jb

Michael A Smith Date Bailiff

Tape Nos. Amy Luttman

May 9, 2023

Mark J Goldsmith Kyle J McGinn

mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com kmcginn@hauptman-obrien.net

Steven M Lathrop

slathrop@hauptman-obrien.net

Date: May 9, 2023 Signature: _____________________________________

COURT COPY
ORDER

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA

MAUREEN BARRETT V. WALMART, INC. Case ID: CI23-223

This matter came before the Court on the 9 day of May, 2023 on the Defendant’ th

s motion to dismiss and on the Plaintiff’s motion to for leave to file an 

amended complaint. Kyle McGinn appeared for the Plaintiff. Mark Goldsmith 

appeared for the Defendant. Hearing was held, argument heard and the Court 

finds that the Plaintiff’s motion should be granted and the Defendant’s motion 

should be overruled.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an 

amended complaint is granted, and the Plaintiff shall have 7 days from the date 

of this order to file her amended complaint. The Defendant shall have 10 days 

thereafter to file a pleading in response.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied.

Michael A Smith

ORDER

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA

MAUREEN BARRETT V. WALMART, INC. Case ID: CI23-223

This matter came before the Court on the 9 day of May, 2023 on the Defendant’ th

s motion to dismiss and on the Plaintiff’s motion to for leave to file an 

amended complaint. Kyle McGinn appeared for the Plaintiff. Mark Goldsmith 

appeared for the Defendant. Hearing was held, argument heard and the Court 

finds that the Plaintiff’s motion should be granted and the Defendant’s motion 

should be overruled.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an 

amended complaint is granted, and the Plaintiff shall have 7 days from the date 

of this order to file her amended complaint. The Defendant shall have 10 days 

thereafter to file a pleading in response.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied.

Michael A Smith

Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019898897

Filing Date: 05/09/2023 03:22:25 PM CDT
I, the undersigned, certify that on May 9, 2023 , I served a copy of the foregoing

document upon the following persons at the addresses given, by mailing by United States Mail,

postage prepaid, or via E-mail:

Mark J Goldsmith Steven M Lathrop

mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com slathrop@hauptman-obrien.net

Kyle J McGinn

kmcginn@hauptman-obrien.net

Date: May 9, 2023 BY THE COURT: _____________________________________

CLERK
Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019899630

Filing Date: 05/09/2023 05:22:55 PM CDT

Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Wednesday, May 10, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the

Amended Complaint to the following:

 Walmart, Inc. represented by MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429) service

method: Electronic Service to mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Signature: /s/ Kyle McGinn (Bar Number: 25696)
1 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA 

MAUREEN BARRETT, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

WALMART, INC., 

Defendant. 

Case No. CI 23-223 

STIPULATED PROTECTIVE 

ORDER

 The parties, having reached an agreement for a Protective 

Order, and THE COURT, having been advised in the premises; IT IS 

ORDERED: 

 A. DEFINITIONS. Limitations under this Protective Order 

on the use or disclosure of documents, deposition testimony or other 

discovery designated as "Confidential" shall apply to (a) all 

information, copies, extracts and complete or partial summaries 

prepared or derived from such documents or testimony; (b) portions of 

deposition transcripts, answers to interrogatories, responses to 

requests for admissions, responses to requests for production, initial 

disclosures and exhibits thereto which directly refer or directly relate 

to any such information, documents, copies, extracts or summaries; 

and (c) portions of briefs, memoranda or any other writing filed with 

the Court and exhibits thereto which directly relate to any such 

information, documents, copies, extracts or summaries. Such 

Confidential Information shall include the following: 

i. Any and all documents referring or related to confidential 

and proprietary human resources, customer, or business information; 

financial records of the parties; compensation of Defendant’s current 

or former personnel; policies, procedures and/or training materials of 

Defendant; security of Defendant; and/or Defendant’s organizational 

structure; 

Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019898015

Filing Date: 05/10/2023 08:38:14 AM CDT
2 

ii. Any documents from the personnel, medical, FMLA, or 

workers’ compensation file of any current or former employee or 

contractor; 

iii. Any documents relating to the Plaintiff's medical and/or 

health benefits information or that of any of Defendant's other 

customers or employees; 

iv. Any portions of depositions (audio or video) where 

Confidential Information is disclosed or used as exhibits. 

 B. CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS. Before produced 

documents are copied or inspected, the producing party may stamp as 

"Confidential" any document or deposition testimony it believes 

contains confidential or proprietary business information and/or trade 

secrets in order to limit disclosure as set forth in this Paragraph B. 

Documents may also be designated as "Confidential" by written notice 

to opposing counsel which identifies the documents so designated by 

Bates number. Documents designated "Confidential," deposition 

testimony so designated, and information derived therefrom will be 

retained by counsel and will not be used for any purpose other than 

this litigation and will not be disclosed except pursuant to court order 

entered after notice, to anyone except: 

 i. Counsel who have signed this Order approving it as to 

form and content, attorneys who are employed or are members of the 

law firms of counsel who have signed this Order, retained outside 

counsel, in-house counsel, law clerks, secretaries, or paralegals directly 

involved in this litigation; 

 ii. Experts and consultants retained by either of the parties 

for purposes of assisting in the preparation or presentation of claims or 

defenses; 

 iii. Any deposition or trial witness, during the course of 

deposition or trial testimony, when necessary to the testimony of such 

witness, or during preparation for deposition or trial testimony; 

 iv. Any person who was involved in the preparation of the 
3 

document; 

 v. Court, Court personnel, court reporters, and similar 

personnel; 

 vi. The named parties to this case, excluding their agents 

and/or representatives except those identified at Paragraph B(i) above; 

provided such parties review the confidential materials with their 

attorney or at their attorney's office. "Parties" shall mean those 

officers, directors, and corporate counsel charged with decision-making 

authority on this lawsuit and designated in advance of the disclosure. 

 vii. Any other person with the prior written consent of the 

party producing the document, pleading or deposition testimony. 

 Prior to receiving or being shown such documents or deposition 

testimony, persons falling in the categories listed above in 

subparagraphs (ii), (iv), and (vii) shall be shown a copy of, and shall 

agree in writing, or on the record during trial or deposition, to be 

bound by the terms of this Protective Order. During a deposition, any 

party asserting confidentiality of any of its documents shall ask the 

deponent on the record to accept the terms of this Order. If the 

deponent refuses to assent, disclosure of the documents during 

deposition shall not constitute a waiver of confidentiality. Under such 

circumstances, the witness shall sign the original deposition transcript 

in the presence of the court reporter and no copy of the transcript or 

exhibits shall be given to the deponent. 

 Documents marked confidential shall be maintained at the 

offices of counsel and each party shall not be permitted to keep or 

possess copies of any documents marked confidential, which were 

produced to them by the other party. Provided that, however, each 

party may be shown confidential documents in the presence of their 

counsel or documents may be provided to expert witnesses provided 

the expert witness is not a party and does not provide the documents 

to a party. 

 C. DOCUMENTS ALREADY PRODUCED. Within ten days 

of the entry of this Order, a party may inform the party to whom 
4 

documents have been produced that it considers certain documents 

already produced as being subject to this Order as "Confidential". 

 D. THIRD PARTY WITNESSES. A copy of this Protective 

Order shall be served with a subpoena or Notice of Deposition on each 

third-party deponent. A third-party witness may designate a 

document as "Confidential" pursuant to this Order by stamping it with 

such notice prior to production or so identifying it on the record during 

the deposition of that third party. Either party may also designate 

documents produced by a third party as being "Confidential" pursuant 

to the terms of this Order within ten (10) days of being made aware of 

the content of such documents. Any document produced by a third 

party shall be treated as "Confidential" pursuant to the terms of this 

Order for such ten (10) day period and thereafter if designated as 

"Confidential" by either party or by the third party which produces it. 

The "Confidential" restrictions of this Order shall no longer apply to 

any document produced by a third party which has not been 

designated as "Confidential" by the third party or by a party within 

such ten (10) day period. 

 E. CHALLENGE TO DESIGNATION. Any party may 

challenge the "Confidential" designation of any document, by moving 

the Court for an Order to challenge the confidentiality designation. 

The parties shall attempt to resolve such disagreement before 

submitting it to the Court. If the challenging party files such a motion 

within such time, the documents shall continue to be treated as 

"Confidential" pursuant to the terms of this Order until such time as 

the Court has made a ruling with respect to the motion. The burden to 

prove the document is not privileged is on the moving party. 

 F. RETURN OF DOCUMENTS. Upon completion of the 

litigation all documents and copies of the same designated 

"Confidential" shall be destroyed or returned to counsel for the 

producing party with signed statement reflecting the disposition. This 

Order shall not terminate upon the conclusion of this action but shall 

continue until the further order of the Court or until the party 

claiming confidentiality has waived the same in writing. 

 
5 

 G. USE OF DOCUMENTS. Documents produced by any 

party, including, but not limited to, "Confidential" documents and 

information from any documents acquired in discovery in this litigation 

shall not be used for any purpose except in connection with this 

litigation. Nothing in this Order shall limit any party or person in its 

use of its own documents or from disclosing its own documents and 

information. This Order or production of any documents shall not 

affect the admissibility of any such document or be deemed a waiver of 

any objection to the admissibility of such documents. 

 H. EXCEPTIONS. The restrictions embodied in this Order 

shall be binding on the party to whom "Confidential" information is 

disclosed unless and until there is a showing that: 

 i. Such information was or has become public knowledge 

absent a breach of this Protective Order; or 

 ii. The party to whom such disclosure was made had already 

learned such information from a third party who himself has not 

breached any confidential relationship which may have existed or 

exists between such third party and the party making the disclosure. 

 I. NON-EXCLUSIVITY. This Order does not affect the 

right of a party to seek to compel disclosure or production of a 

document or to seek an order modifying or limiting this Order in any 

aspect. The obligations and prohibitions under this Order are not 

exclusive. No disclosure under this order shall constitute a waiver of 

any objection to admissibility of the document or applicable privilege. 

All other ethical, legal and equitable obligations are unaffected by this 

agreement. 

 J. WAIVER. Any waiver under this Order must be made in 

writing or, if at a deposition or in Court, on the record. 

 K. ENFORCEMENT. Any party or person subject to the 

obligations and prohibitions of this Order who is determined by the 

Court to have violated its terms is subject to sanctions imposed by the 

Court pursuant to the Supreme Court's Discovery Rules or other 

applicable law. 
6 

 SO ORDERED this ____ day of ________________ 2023. 

 BY THE COURT: 

 

 District Court Judge 

Prepared, Submitted, and Agreed Upon By: 

MAUREEN BARRETT, Plaintiff, 

By: _/s/ Kyle J. McGinn________ 

Kyle J. McGinn (NE# 25696) 

Hauptman, O’Brien, Wolf & 

Lathrop, P.C. 

1005 S 107th Ave, Ste 200 

Omaha, NE 68114 

Phone: 402-390-9000 

 Facsimile: 402-397-791 

Email: 

kmcginn@omahapersonalinjury.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

WALMART, INC., Defendant, 

By: /s/Mark J. Goldsmith 

Mark J. Goldsmith (NE# 

26429) 

George E. Martin, III (NE# 

21747) 

BAIRD HOLM LLP 

1700 Farnam St, Ste 1500 

Omaha, NE 68102-2068 

Phone: 402-344-0500 

Facsimile: 402-344-0588 

Email: 

mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com 

gmartin@bairdholm.com

 Attorney for Defendant 

DOCS/2969759.1 

10th May
I, the undersigned, certify that on May 10, 2023 , I served a copy of the foregoing

document upon the following persons at the addresses given, by mailing by United States Mail,

postage prepaid, or via E-mail:

Mark J Goldsmith Steven M Lathrop

mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com slathrop@hauptman-obrien.net

Kyle J McGinn

kmcginn@hauptman-obrien.net

Date: May 10, 2023 BY THE COURT: _____________________________________

CLERK
Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019959757

Filing Date: 05/23/2023 01:33:30 PM CDT



Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Tuesday, May 23, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the

Motion-Leave to File Additional Pleadings to the following:

 Walmart, Inc. represented by MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429) service

method: Electronic Service to mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Signature: /s/ Kyle McGinn (Bar Number: 25696)
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA 

MAUREEN BARRETT, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

WALMART, INC., , 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. CI 23-223 

ANSWER AND 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

TO THE PLAINTIFF’S FIRST 

AMENDED COMPLAINT 

 Defendant Walmart, Inc. (“Walmart”), by and through its undersigned 

counsel, for its Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Plaintiff's First Amended 

Complaint & Demand for Trial by Jury (the “FAC”) in the above-captioned 

matter, alleges as follows: 

1. Walmart is without sufficient information to admit the allegations 

contained in Paragraph 1 of the FAC and therefore denies them. 

2. Walmart admits that it is a Delaware corporation with its principal 

place of business located in Bentonville, Arkansas, and that owned and operated 

the store located at 8525 S 71st Plaza, Papillion, Sarpy County, Nebraska, but 

denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 2 of the FAC. 

3. Paragraph 3 of the FAC calls for a legal conclusion to which no 

response is required, and therefore Walmart denies the allegations contained 

therein. 

4. Paragraph 4 of the FAC calls for a legal conclusion to which no 

response is required, and therefore Walmart denies the allegations contained 

therein. 

Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0019977407

Filing Date: 05/25/2023 06:02:38 PM CDT
5. Paragraph 5 of the FAC calls for a legal conclusion to which no 

response is required, and therefore Walmart denies the allegations contained 

therein. 

6. Walmart is without sufficient information to admit the allegations 

contained in Paragraph 6 of the FAC and therefore denies them. 

7. Walmart denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 7 of the 

FAC. 

8. Walmart denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 8 of the 

FAC. 

9. Walmart denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 9 of the 

FAC. 

10. Walmart denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 10 of the 

FAC. Walmart specifically denies that it is responsible for any alleged damages 

to the Plaintiff. 

11. Paragraph 11 of the FAC calls for a legal conclusion to which no 

response is required, and therefore Walmart denies the allegations contained 

therein. 

12. Walmart specifically denies that it is responsible for any alleged 

damages to the Plaintiff and further denies the remaining allegations contained in 

the “Wherefore” clause following Paragraph 11 of the FAC. 

WHEREFORE, Walmart requests that the Court dismiss the Plaintiff’s First 

Amended Complaint with prejudice and award Walmart its reasonable attorney’s 

fees and costs incurred in defending this matter and other relief the Court considers 

appropriate. 
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

1. The damages allegedly sustained by the Plaintiff, if any, were 

proximately caused and contributed to by the Plaintiff’s own negligence and want 

of ordinary care, which is equal to, or greater than, the total negligence of all 

persons or entities against whom recovery is sought and of a sufficient degree to 

totally bar any recovery. 

2. The injuries or damages allegedly sustained by the Plaintiff were 

proximately caused by an intervening and/or superseding cause or causes, which 

Walmart neither supervised nor controlled, and had no right or ability to supervise 

or control. 

3. The Plaintiff has failed to take certain reasonable and practical steps 

to mitigate any damages she may have sustained as a result of the alleged events 

referred to in the FAC. 

4. In the event Walmart is found liable, the Plaintiff's damages, if any, 

should be reduced in proportion to her comparative fault. 

5. The Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of assumption of 

risk. 

6. The FAC fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted. 

7. Walmart reserves the right to raise any additional affirmative 

defenses which become known or of which Walmart becomes aware during the 

course of discovery or investigation. 

Dated this 25th day of May 2023. 
WALMART INC., Defendant, 

By: /s/ Mark J. Goldsmith 

Mark J. Goldsmith (NE #26429) 

George E. Martin III (NE #21747) 

 Of BAIRD HOLM LLP 

1500 Woodmen Tower 

1700 Farnam Street 

Omaha, NE 68102-2068 

Phone: 402-344-0500 

mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com 

gemartin@bairdholm.com 

DOCS/2972287.2 
Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Friday, May 26, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the

Answer to the following:

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Kyle McGinn (Bar Number: 25696) service method:

Electronic Service to kmcginn@hauptman-obrien.net

 Signature: /s/ MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429)
Filed in Sarpy District Court

*** EFILED ***

Case Number: D59CI230000223

Transaction ID: 0020009278

Filing Date: 06/02/2023 11:18:55 AM CDT

Certificate of Service

 I hereby certify that on Friday, June 02, 2023 I provided a true and correct copy of the

Amended Complaint to the following:

 Barrett,Maureen, represented by Steven Lathrop (Bar Number: 16602) service method:

Electronic Service to mwatson@hauptman-obrien.net

 Walmart, Inc. represented by MARK JOSEPH GOLDSMITH (Bar Number: 26429) service

method: Electronic Service to mgoldsmith@bairdholm.com

 Signature: /s/ Kyle McGinn (Bar Number: 25696)