Quote:
Originally Posted by spwemonkie
That's not correct.
The reason the woman got big bags of money was that McDonalds knowingly made the decision to serve the coffee too hot as a way to save cost on coffee beans (I don't know the reason this works but it was detailed in McD's memos). They took in the cost of lawsuits for problems with temperature of the coffee.
mostly correct. but the bigger reason she got big bags of money (relatively speaking) was that she initially only asked for her actual medical expenses to be covered with maybe a nominal amount for pain and suffering added on for the third degree burns she suffered. McD's offered to settle for some crazy low stupid amount, like less than $1000. the jury decided that this was an outrageous situation and threw the book at McD's for failing to accept her reasonable demands and nailed it for an high punitive damages award.
nothing about the outcome of this case is in any way outrageous or out of line. you are a repeat offender, you fail to address the issue, then you cause a little old lady to suffer third degree burns, which were foreseeable under the circumstances, and THEN fail to cover her actual medical expenses? adios big corp v. little old lady. shows the importance of what attorneys do for our society. its not like legislators are ever going to cover this situation with legislation. they fill an important gap.
Last edited by j_thunders; 05-05-2020 at 10:10 PM.
Reason: added language that complies with Palsgraf