What is the duty of a defendant to prevent a pedestrian from being injured in a parking lot?

Plaintiffs contend that because "accidents of the general type, pedestrian v. vehicular in parking lots are sufficiently foreseeable, if not in fact, likely to occur," defendant had a duty "to take precautionary measures at minimal cost to protect pedestrians required to traverse its parking lot." In support of their contention, plaintiffs rely heavily on two cases. We discuss those cases in parts A and B before we distinguish them in part C below.