Xombe Trojan poses as Microsoft warning

TalkBack 40 of 61:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Myths and misrepresentations about the McD's lawsuit

Sigh, here we go again with the facts:

http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

McFacts about the McDonalds Coffee Lawsuit


Everyone knows what you're talking about when you
mention "the McDonald's lawsuit." Even though this case
was decided in August of 1994, for many Americans it
continues to represent the "problem" with our civil justice
system.


The business community and insurance industry have
done much to perpetuate this case. They don't want us to
forget it. They know it helps them convince politicians that
"tort reform" and other restrictions on juries is needed.
And worse, they know it poisons the minds of citizens who
sit on juries.


Unfortunately, not all the facts have been communicated -
facts that put the case and the monetary award to the 81-
year old plaintiff in a significantly different light.


According to the Wall Street journal, McDonald's
callousness was the issue and even jurors who thought the
case was just a tempest in a coffee pot were overwhelmed
by the evidence against the Corporation.


The facts of the case, which caused a jury of six men and
six women to find McDonald's coffee was unreasonably
dangerous and had caused enough human misery and
suffering that no one should be made to suffer exposure
to such excessively hot coffee again, will shock and amaze
you:


McFact No. 1:? For years, McDonald's had known they had
a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their
coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more
so) than at other restaurants.


McFact No. 2:? McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes
caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of
scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled
by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as
consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.


McFact No. 3:? The woman involved in this infamous case
suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her
groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a
seven-day hospital stay.


McFact No. 4:? The woman, an 81-year old former
department store clerk who had never before filed suit
against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the
lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not
dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills.


McFact No. 5:? A McDonald's quality assurance manager
testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the
risk of serving dangerously hot coffee and had no plans to
either turn down the heat or to post warning about the
possibility of severe burns, even though most customers
wouldn't think it was possible.


McFact No. 6:? After careful deliberation, the jury found
McDonald's was liable because the facts were
overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the
punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald's had
engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct,
and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million
dollars. (The equivalent of just two days of coffee sales,
McDonalds Corporation generates revenues in excess of
1.3 million dollars daily from the sale of its coffee, selling
1 billion cups each year.)


McFact No. 7:? On appeal, a judge lowered the award to
$480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.


McFact No. 8:? A report in Liability Week, September 29,
1997, indicated that Kathleen Gilliam, 73, suffered first
degree burns when a cup of coffee spilled onto her lap.
Reports also indicate that McDonald's consistently keeps
its coffee at 185 degrees, still approximately 20 degrees
hotter than at other restaurants. Third degree burns occur
at this temperature in just two to seven seconds, requiring
skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that
cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent
disfigurement, extreme pain and disability to the victims
for many months, and in some cases, years.



The most important message this case has for you, the
consumer, is to be aware of the potential danger posed by
your early morning pick-me-up. Take extra care to make
sure children do not come into contact with scalding
liquid, and always look to the facts before rendering your
decision about any publicized case.

Courtesy of Legal News and Views, Ohio Academy of Trial
Lawyers

Posted by: tic swayback   Posted on: 01/12/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Why Isn't Server Virtualization Saving Us More? A Few Small Changes May Dramatically Increase Your Efficiency VMware Companies have rapidly adopted server virtualization over the past few ... Download Now
• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now
• Email Security and Archiving - Clearer in the Cloud Google The time is NOW for businesses and organizations of all sizes to implement ... Download Now