There is a such thing as premise liability. They have a duty to provide a safe work/shopping environment that extends to all of its workers and patrons. They had a duty to control the crowds and Walmart's failure to do so resulted in its potential negligence and exposure to liability.

Its called Duty/risk analysis. The question is whether Walmart had a duty to protect this worker from this type of injury/death resulting from this type of event? A reasonable person, after learning the facts, would probably say yes. In this case, I think that the family has a strong case against Walmart and others involved. I just wonder if the claims against Walmart would be limited in Workers Compensation since he was in the course and scope of his employment when he was injured.

What is the Risk/utility? What could Walmart have done to protect this person from this type of injury or death? Hire a few off-duty cops to control the crowd? How much would that have cost Walmart? 2-3 grand for a day's work?

Whas this event forseeable? Walmart knew or should have known that black friday crowds are large and highly aggressive and that damages or injuries could result from the activity.

Look up your own state's tort law and see what it has to say on the issue.

People being @ssholes on black friday was reasonably forseeable, and Walmart should have been prepared.

So, if one of your employees hits me over the head or causes me to become injured during the course and scope of his employment, I cannot come after your business for compensation for my injuries?

...and a competent one at that.