This is an ordinary retail slip-and-fall case under Louisiana law per diversity jurisdiction. Although the plaintiff pleaded that she fell because of the defendant store’s failure to remove a foreign substance on the floor, she testified that she does not recall what caused her to fall.

The defendant moved for summary judgment, which the district court granted, issuing a succinct but sufficiently thorough ruling that carefully examined the facts in light of Louisiana law. The court concluded, “Upon burden shifting to non-movant, Plaintiff falls short of carrying her burden of proof because the statute does not allow the factfinder to make inferences of the condition, but requires Plaintiff to make a positive showing. The Court concludes Plaintiff has failed to make a positive showing of the existence of the condition prior to the fall.”

The summary judgment is AFFIRMED, essentially for the reasons convincingly stated by the district court.