The Lawsuit Lottery

[SKC Raymond Kurtz]

I wanted to post this under the smoking thread, but didn't want to move it off into another direction.

Let me get this straight. You buy a cup of hot coffee, (I don't drink coffee but I assume it is served hot.)

You put it between your legs. Drive over a speed bump. The coffee spills. You get burned.

You sued because you did not realize you could get burned by a cup of hot coffee.

BTW "You" is not directed at any one person, especially on this site.

A gentleman with a heart condition tried to start a lawnmower. He keeled over with a heart attack and died. Instead of just accepting that sometimes bad things happen to good people, the family sued the lawnmower manufacturer and won.

Someone walking down the side walk stumbled and fell. Guess what happened next? Yep, gotta sue the city.

A thug uses a gun in commission of a crime. Someone is injured or killed. Instead of just accepting the bad circumstances or suing the perp, the family or the victim sue the gun maker.

The lawsuits against the tobacco makers drove me crazy. Everyone that could read should have understood that smoking cigarettes could cause cancer. Some lawyer got the bright idea that there was money to be made.

Yes, I know about the tobacco makers being suspected of hiding data that would prove that tobacco was addictive, etc. Still there was overwhelming evidence before the flood of lawsuits begain that cigarettes caused cancer. The smokers had plenty of warning.

The local TV station is running a commercial for a local law firm. It seems that little Johnny got the bright idea one day or night to climb a fence surrounding an electrical substation. (I assume there was a fence since every electrical substation I have seen has a fence surrounding it.) Johnny got injured. The family sued and won. My question is what in the heck was little Johnny doing climbing a fence around a substation is the first place? Isn't that trespassing?

I could go on and on and on. I do realize that sometimes lawsuits are neccessary, but, what people in this country have forgotten is that sometimes bad things happen and there is absolutely no one to blame.

[BMC Trent Spiroff]

My favorite... ...it's January in the north country. It snowed last night. The sidewalks are icy. Here comes "Mr. Walk my dog every morning", falls down and breaks his hip on the sidewalk in front of the coffee shop. The shop owner is responsible for the fallen dog walker. The coffee shop's not even open because the owners still at home digging out his car. Why does the shop owner have to pay out for an act of nature?

T.S.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

My favorites are the people who sue themselves against their own home owners policy. If you fall off the ladder you have a hard time suing the ladder company because they posted the warning...... but sue yourself for being an idiot and your lawyer gets the insurance company to pay for it.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

And what is the common denominator here? LAWYER!!! Ambulance chasing, 40% taking....

[SKC Raymond Kurtz]

Man threatens to sue over 'slow arrest'

A convicted sex offender claims he lost some toes to frostbite because he wasn't arrested quickly enough.

Harvey Taylor, who's wanted in Florida, fled into the Maine woods to escape from police.

He is now threatening to sue.

The Bangor News reports the 48-year-old spent at least three nights in the woods after running away from a Sheriff's detective.

Speaking from St Joseph Hospital in Bangor, he said: "If the detective had done his job, I wouldn't be in here now.

"I'm trying to find an attorney to bring a lawsuit against this detective. If he had done his job properly I wouldn't be in the condition that I'm in right now. I would have been in jail that very same day."

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

I think that might become my favorite. Of course he's going to have to win some kind of settlement first....... but he's definetly in the running. If he does win, I'd like to meet each of the jurors and thank them personally for making this country a better place to live in.

And I bet the Sherriff's detective feels really bad after reading that article. You know that poor convicted sex offender may never walk right again.

[YNC Josh Braarud]

Like everything, there are two sides to the story:

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.

[MSTCS Jerald P. Motyka]

The only lawsuits above I will even touch are the coffee and the icy sidewalk.

If you spill hot coffee in your lap, you expect to get burns, but do you expect to get THIRD degree burns? McDonalds had been warned for years about coffee that was served at temps that were undrinkable... but they ignored the warnings. The woman, I freely admit, was an idiot by putting the coffee cup on her dash as she backed up, and it comes as no surprise that it fell when she braked hard to avoid an accident. The deal with the lawsuit was the fact that she didn't end up with red, swollen thighs and crotch. Some of her FLESH was COOKED by the uber-hot coffee. Third degree burns - from a liquid that she was allegedly supposed to "drink".

When she sued, all she wanted were bucks to cover the doctor bills - and no more. She got $3+ million dollars, which was appealed down to $500K - which was the cost of the hospital and doctors... and what she had sought in the first place.

Not too hard to justify.
______________________________________________
Now, to the sidewalk.

If you "let" snow fall on your sidewalk, it gets snowy, no surprise. When you attempt to clean it off, there is an expectation that you are doing a "good job" of it. If the coffee shop shoveled, you would expect that the sidewalk they shoveled was "clean". It wasn't. Mr. "Walks the Dog" thought it was clean as well - and fell on his can.

Who's fault? The jury obviously thought the people that attempted to clean the sidewalk were at fault more than the dog walker.
__________________________________________

Please don't take this as my endorsement of lawsuits just for the purpose of getting rich, as I don't. I've had the "opportunity" to sue several times for stuff that happened - and I looked at the situation and marked it down to either "Spit happens", or "Be more careful next time". Sometimes lawsuits ARE justified - but when discussed in a biased manner, they sound like crap.

For a quick Lawsuit 101: When these lawsuits are finished and blame has been laid, BOTH sides get blamed. If Mr. Walks the Dog was 30% to blame for just being there - and the coffee shop was 70% to blame for not properly clearing the walk, then Mr. Dog only gets 70% of the money "awarded" by the jury. If the jury says that Mr. Dog was 51% to blame, he gets NOTHING...

I just wanted to put my ten cents in the ring. Oh, and to add: the other suits sound just ridiculous... but I wonder what REALLY happened.
______________________
Edited to add: Damn... spanked by Josh. Thanks for the more accurate numbers!!

[YNC Josh Braarud]

Beat ya on the coffee one by about 30 seconds... :D

Third degree burns on the groin. :eek:

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

And I still don't see it.

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.

That's a Mcfact. Hot coffee is a problem. McDonald's knew that. So they admitted somewhere to someone that they "Knew" their hot coffee was a "problem". Not buying it.

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 ........... what evidence did they present that showed this ? Oh, that coffee is dangerously hot, yes we're well aware of that.

And in your Mcfacts you said that McDonald had already paid out on 700 other cases where their coffee had done damage. Cases they obviously felt as though they were at least partially responsible for.

I'm with McDonald's on this case. You buy the coffee and put it on your dash. Your driving causes the coffee that you purchased to fall on your lap. You're more responsible than we are for your injuries.

Now if she had pulled up to the drive thru and the manager had thrown the coffe on her lap, blame McDonald's.

And McFact that you're missing....... she sued for 114 million dollars. The juror may have said 3 million was enough, but the judge, who I'm assuming knows a little bit more about the law, said I'll give her $480,000. The lawyer took 40% of that ....... and her insurance probably paid for the medical bills anyway.

McSadFact. People list what McDonalds makes in selling coffee in an average day, as if that matters. McLogical Fact, if they're selling that much coffee everyday, people must like the coffee that hot when they buy it.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Jerald, Josh,........ no reply ?

Well you can call the coffee anything thing that you want, just don't use undrinkable, or unreasonably dangerous. They sell 1,000,000,000 cups a year. Someone is drinking it. They paid out 700 times. For arguement sake let's say that was all in one year. That's one person out of every 1,428,571. That's still quite a saftey record. Let's say it was all in one day, that's one person out of every 3,914. Still a long way from undrinkable or unreasonably dangerous.
And if it were an 18 YO man instead of an 81 YO woman, I think people would be less understanding or sympathetic.
A question to either of you. If a mom and pop store had been the ones who sold her the coffee, and it was that same 185 uber-hot degrees, and they had a proportional number of complaints about the coffee that they sold, should they have paid out the same 3 million dollars ? How about just the same 480,000 ?
Just because a company can afford to pay, doesn't mean that they should have to.

[YNC Josh Braarud]

Jerald, Josh,........ no reply?

I was at home, mate.

I'm sorry, but I was raised blue collar, and I firmly believe in punitive damages. You may recall that at that time very few cars came with cupholders, and it was common practice to keep your drink in your lap.

Screw McDonalds.

[ETC (FT type) Ed Shank]

The icy sidewalk...

If the state plows the highway but you hit a patch of black ice and crash your car can you sue? Just because the snow is removed doesn't mean all the danger is. You can't "assume" anything, we all know what that does. If you live in an area that gets snow, there is no reason you don't expect it to be slippery regardless of the conditions. It's nothing but trying to make a buck.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Okay but you're saying screw McDonalds "because" they're a large corporation and can afford to pay. What about those blue collar mom and pop stores that have to fold because they can no longer afford the insurance that they need to carry. I was raised blue collar also. I was taught to work for what you got. If you put hot coffee on your lap, it isn't the fault of the people who sold it to you. And you seem to think if they had put a label on it reminding people that it was hot, they would have covered themselves.

I believe in punitive damages also, ........ if the company was at fault. I don't think they were at fault here.

[SKC Raymond Kurtz]

Check out this website, http://www.power-of-attorneys.com/StupidLawsuit.htm
just as a tease from the site I submit the following, (there are plenty more including the infamous McCoffee lawsuit story.)

A Little Too Much Booty.
________________________________________
Meredith Berkman, seeking $50 million, filed one of the first anti-fat lawsuits against the manufacturer of a snack food named Pirate's Booty. It looks like eating too much Pirate's Booty had added too much booty to Ms. Berkman's booty.
In December, 2001, the Good Housekeeping Institute tested Pirate's Booty, which is basically flavored puffed rice, and found that it contained 147 calories and 8.5 grams of fat, while its label said it contained only 120 calories and 2.5 grams of fat.
The manufacturer, Robert's American Gourmet Foods (a subsidiary of Keystone Foods), blamed the problem on a change in its manufacturing process and immediately recalled the product from store shelves.
Nearly four months after the recall, Berkman filed a $50 million class-action lawsuit against Robert's Foods, claiming "emotional distress" and "weight gain...mental anguish, outrage and indignation." The complaint claims to represent all consumers who ruined their diets and had to spend more time at the gym because they ate mislabeled Pirate's Booty.

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

[QUOTE=SKC Raymond Kurtz]Check out this website, http://www.power-of-attorneys.com/StupidLawsuit.htm
just as a tease from the site I submit the following, (there are plenty more including the infamous McCoffee lawsuit story.)

A Little Too Much Booty.

Ray
Definately not what I thought the story was going to be about. :D