Well, I wouldn't expect you to show me hundreds, but why don't you start by showing how some of these cases are misreported... I have no doubt that most cases are legit, but a lot of them, especially when dealing with insurance and malpractice, are not.
Facts in Stella Liebeck vs. McDonalds:
What you often read and hear: Liebeck ordered coffee (which everyone expects to be hot), and
drove off spilling the hot coffee on herself. Awarded a total of $2.7 Million in damages. Pretty much all you hear, right?
Facts: Liebeck was a passenger, not the driver. The car, driven by her grandson, was stopped. She placed the coffee between her knees to add cream. Spilled it, and recieved 3rd degree burns (full thickness burns) over 6% of her body, including her innerthighs, perinium, buttocks, etc.
McDonalds had recieved hundreds (@ 700 in the prior 10 years) of complaints of serious burns due to their coffe in the past...ie they were on notice.
Their own quality control manager testified that he was aware of these complaints but kept strict orders to maitain the coffee at 180 Degree, + or - 5 Degrees. Further admitted to a burning hazard on any food served over 140 degrees, and stated that coffee served at the temp that McDonalds held the coffee was, in fact, not consumable as it would cause severe burns to the mouth and throat at that temp. Said they had no intention of changing the holding temp either. There was substantial testimony about how hot other establishments hold and serve their coffee, about what temps will cause burns, etc. etc.
Oh, then there was the fact that Liebeck initially only asked for $20,000 dollars to cover her meds of $11,000 from an 8 day hospital stay, skin grafts, debridements, etc. ( a far cry from a normal "ouch that's hot" burn) McDonalds refused, but did offer something like $800.
The warning on the cup was deemed to be insufficient as to the extent of the potential danger.
Finally, a JURY that heard the facts, not a lawyer or a judge, awarded $200K in compensatory damages, and $2.7 in punitives (an amount equal to about 2 days coffee sales for McDonalds). The compensatory damages were reduced by 20% because Liebeck was found 20% at fault.
The judge said McDonalds was reckless, callous and willful.
Afterwards the judge reduced the punitive award to $480K.
And it was appealed...and subsequently settled before the appeals were exahausted.
Now, I know that you the hard line is "she spilled the coffee, her fault, no money for her". If you feel that way, fine. Then, in your eyes, it's a frivolous suit. I can't change that...but the facts aren't as most, ie THE FUCKING STELLA AWARDS, would have you believe. I'm not going to delve in to every one you cited. STELLA is notorious for inexact, inaccurate, and flat false reporting of facts in these cases, but then they have a "tort reform" agenda too. What would you expect?
223 Replies
34924 Views