Anza: To those who think the McDonald's case is frivolous: You have no idea what you're talking about. There's much better examples of "frivolous" lawsuits out there. That one isn't one of them.

1) The woman tried to settle for $20000, which would have just covered her medical expenses (from 3rd degree burns over 6 percent of her body). McDonalds refused.
2) McDonald had been warned about the heat of their coffee before. From 1982-1992 over 700 complaints had been filed about the heat of the coffee, many with similar burns to the plaintiff. McDonalds did nothing.
3) Coffee you make at home is usually around 135-140 degrees. McDonalds served theirs at 180-190 (which is 20-30 degrees below boiling)
4) McDonalds was screwed by their own testimony. I quote: "McDonald's own quality assurance manager testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above and that McDonald's coffee was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat."

"The quality assurance manager further testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that while burns would occur, McDonald's had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee."

"McDonald's asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. However, the company's own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving."

"The testimony of Mr. [Christopher] Appleton, the McDonald's executive, didn't help the company, jurors said later. He testified that McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious burns, but hadn't consulted burn experts about it. He also testified that McDonald's had decided not to warn customers about the possibility of severe burns, even though most people wouldn't think it possible. Finally, he testified that McDonald's didn't intend to change any of its coffee policies or procedures, saying, 'There are more serious dangers in restaurants.' ""

5) In addition, the plaintiff's testimony was fairly damning.

"Plaintiff's expert, a scholar in thermodynamics as applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids at 180 degrees will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds."

"Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn."

http://www.baumlaw.com/mcDonalds.html

And the woman still got this molten lava hot coffee and since it was burning her hands thru the cup she put it in her crotch and took the lid off the cup.

Yeah its oversited because of the original ridiculous monetary award, which was reduced to a much more reasonable amount on appeal, but this woman is the reason we have warning labels on Irons telling you not to lick the irons surface to determine if its on. She was a retard

Bermuda59: Did I leave anyone out?

The families of Ben Franklin and Thomas Edison. For their contributions to the theories of electricity which made the electrical box possible.

Two words to end such foolishness - LOSER PAYS

arsenaldb: Anyone hear of the "deep pocket" theory of tort law?

Anybody......?

...

Well I think I covered that under my post about only suing large companies and celebrities. Sue people for whom its better to settle than fight for years under negative publicity.

One must ask if the cost of a decent sniper is less than the legal fees of fighting this

Obama's Left Nut: jpallan:

When you have attorneys refusing the opportunity to appear in the newspaper, you know something is seriously farked.

This is not true. I have worked on some (locally) high profile cases in my time and I ALWAYS refuse to comment. The case should be tried in the court room not in the press.

Yeah but you are a testicle, hiding in plain sight is what comes naturally.

serpent_sky: superdolfan1: FTFA: "...is being sued as are several law enforcement agencies that arrested or cited Hernandez but did not report him to federal authorities for deportation.

Should the agencies not be excused from the lawsuit? After all, had they turned him in for deportation, then our "Plaintiffs of the Year" couldn't sue the driver, nor could they call the driver to the stand as he would be gone. He will most likely make a very good material witness.

Not to mention, he's actually had a hell of a lot of criminal charges thrown at him and will likely be spending the rest of his life in jail. You'd think knowing that justice was served for what he did would be enough -- not suing

Is there legal code that says a store can't have a solid plate-glass window? That they have to have a "Safety barrier"? I'm thinking of a lot of stores, just walking distance from my house, that are pretty much nothing more than plate glass windows and cars ostensibly could drive through them ... but it is a really rare thing.

I feel bad for them, but their abuse of the legal system is pretty sickening. (The lawyer who convinced them to go hog wild and abuse the legal system, or at the very least, insist the parents sue reasonably or refuse the case should have his credentials examined.)

Actually, it's MUCH dumber still, if I read correctly.
The one suing was in a CAR, on the street, whose passenger was killed when they were hit by the meth dude and pushed INTO the BR.

It's probably unlikely that any collisions which occurred during plowing through a BR caused the fatality. In any case, any "safety barrier", such as concrete bollards, would have only protected people INSIDE the store, which is not what they're suing over. They'd make it MORE dangerous for the person running into the store since a well-build bollard is a very destructive collision.

They're suing the car dealership for selling a car to a man without a valid driver's license. What's wrong with this?

I am the royal prince of Nygerria, and I believe it to be my fault. Please contact me and we can see if we can make a settlement that my lawyer decided on to be the sum totalled of $100,000,000 (one hundred million) US dollars.

Yours sincerely and with God and Jupiter,
1-phenylpropan-2-amine, crown prince of Nogeria.
p­r­in­ce_of­f­_n­iger­r­i­a­914c­o­m

AntiNorm: Talon: If you seriously think the McD's coffee case is "frivolous" then you really don't know much of anything about the case.

The McD's coffee case is/was more meritorious than this family and their 3 y.o.

I've read all the facts in that case. There is one important fact that usually gets left out: The plaintiff in that case spilled the coffee in her own lap. Anybody with two brain cells knows that coffee is hot, and you have to be very careful with it.

That lawsuit was frivolous.

Not just spilled the coffee in her lap, but **held the cup between her knees** - which is pretty much asking to crush the cup and spill it everywhere.

Sorry, but the likes of Talon won't ever persuade me that case was anything other than frivolous. Frankly, if you're not capable of figuring out the safe method of holding a beverage which is generally made with boiling or near-boiling water, you have only yourself to blame.

What next, a lawsuit from somebody who got run over at a pedestrian crossing, because they looked up, down, and up again but didn't see any traffic coming?

We shouldn't be litigating "stupid". If you're not able to show basic common sense, you shouldn't be able to sue - because it's not exactly fair to penalize the entire rest of the country so that you don't *have* to use common sense.

House of Tards 2010-02-28 03:30:53 PM I am very sorry that their child is dead. I really would like them to die however. In a painful, painful manner.
=============================================

No, they can survive... So long as the judge laughs them out of the courtroom.

SchlingFocker: Really, parents get too worked up over the death of a child. You can make more, people.

This dude saved the parents years of money and headaches.

It's not like they'd had the kid long enough to really get attached to him.

MasterPython: bighasbeen:
I doubt there are many kids whose death would bring joy to others. Can't say the same for adults.

Oh I don't know about that, had a kid trip me the other day while I was carrying a bucket of ice, and I got nothing a lawyer would want, and a cop eating a sammich just shrugged and held back a giggle...what options do I have?

speeding illegal immigrant

They took our kid!

DEY TUKED AHR KEED!

DEHTUKKER HEED!

If this "undocumented" Mexicant didn't come here this tragedy wouldn't have happened. If the car dealership didn't sell the Mexicant the car then this wouldn't have happened. All those who harbor this CRIMINAL ALIEN should be held accountable.


-Combat Marine Vet


Flame on Anti-Americans.

noscamman: All those who harbor this CRIMINAL ALIEN should be held accountable

2 things to consider.

1. Proximate cause

2. Sovereign immunity.

gweilo8888: Sorry, but the likes of Talon won't ever persuade me that case was anything other than frivolous.

That's because you are not smart enough to realize that when you've been warned several times that the product you sell is more dangerous than normal, and you then ignore those warnings, and then those warning fruit, you get to be legally at fault.

ensjoeski: Stealing from someone else:
Not-garbage:
* The car dealership for selling the immigrant the car, on the grounds that the purchaser held "an invalid driver's licence".
* The individual salesman who sold the immigrant the car, on the same grounds.
* The illegal immigrant who just got convicted of 19 counts and is facing more than a century in prison.
* The immigrant wife's parents, "because they may have provided him with the [vehicle]."
* Any police officers that had arrested or cited the immigrant without ensuring his deportation.

Garbage
* The local energy company, for "failure to reasonably supervise, control and maintain a switch box."
* The State and City due to a widening of the road that occurred five years previously to the accident.
* The parent company of the ice cream shop "because the store's wall facing the street was made of glass and did not have safety barriers."
* The owner of the land on which the shop was built.
* The family of the dead meth addict.

Why is the illegals family fair game, but not the meth addict's family? They MAY have provided the car to her. They probably knew she was a meth addict and did not take the necessary steps to make her stop driving. It seems like the same argument.

And glass store fronts are horrible because they encourage window shopping.

thenateman: Exploitingmybaby.com

Who the hell would read all that crap?

An that durn beaner is gunna get off light too, only 100 years in prison, should be forced to eat off his own taco truck!

NightOwl2255: Digitalstrange: And the woman still got this molten lava hot coffee and since it was burning her hands thru the cup she put it in her crotch and took the lid off the cup.

I have read way more than I should have on Lieback and have never read that. And I don't think you have either.

Digitalstrange: Yeah its oversited because of the original ridiculous monetary award, which was reduced to a much more reasonable amount on appeal, but this woman is the reason we have warning labels on Irons telling you not to lick the irons surface to determine if its on. She was a retard

The judge decided that treble damages were more reasonable. Which was still more than half a million dollars.

Sure, which is a drop in the bucket for McDs but would still cover the womans injuries.

You havent read as much as you think, Yes the judge found her actions contributed to her injuries because they were to her genitals, not a normal place to hold your coffee, but that McDonalds did bear fault because of the heat of the coffee. Half a million was perfectly reasonable, she was injured because of a decision by McDs management to make their coffee dangerously hot. yes her poor decision making skills exaserbated her injuries but ultimately a corporate decision made her able to hurt herself and, as I say half a million dollars is far more important to her than McDs.

Your right that its oversited as a frivilous case though. The woman had a legitimate argument, It wasnt at all friviolus, as you say she was initially willing to settle for medical bills which was entirely reasonable but overly cautious attorneys for McDs were afraid of admitting fault.

Essentially everyone involved was stupid in some way.

Hernandez was driving about 80 mph when he hit a pickup driven by Patricia Guntharp. Her pickup hit the Baskin-Robbins, killing Guntharp, 49, and her passenger, Debra Serecky, 51. Marten Kudlis was in the shop with his mother.

The family of Guntharp, who was high on methamphetamine at the time of the crash is being sued as are several law enforcement agencies that arrested or cited Hernandez but did not report him to federal authorities for deportation.

Innocent victims? Or DRUG-CRAZED MURDERERS??!?!!@?!@#$!OMGBBQ%@!?

Sygonus: Also, the McDonalds trial was a jury trial. If it was truly frivelous, why did twelve ordinary people award such massive damages? Shouldn't they have all realized how "excessive" it was?

I was all over this post until you said this. Juries are notoriously bad at awarding damages because they usually just pull giant numbers out of their asses depending on their mood. Notice that in the McDonald's lawsuit the jury's original $2.86 million award was reduced by the judge to just under $640,000. See also BMW of North America v. Gore, where the Supreme Court ruled that awarding $4 million in punitive damages over a coat of paint on one car was a violation of Due Process.

/Juries are dumb

What we need are some good ol' fashioned pogroms. That'll teach 'em. If you don't wanna get caught, don't get in the way. Fark devising solutions, fark spending the time and trouble to demand leaders who will take intelligent action on issues, rather than angry populist band-aids while shrugging off the real causes and necessities. What we need are some good ol' fashioned reprisals against any one and any thing we perceive to be our enemy. That'll teach 'em and lead us to the promised land-- the highest pinnacle of human civilization.

JohnCarter: Two words to end such foolishness - LOSER PAYS

Two more words...

Never happen

Lawyers aren't going to allow an enormous revenue stream to dry up.

and this is one of the inherant problems with democracy, it gives too much power to individuals who use that power to shiat on everyones little piece of pie. I can see a lawsuit coming for some in involved but when you start blaming baskin robbins for having a glass window and not having a safety barrier...now i have trouble pulling for you to win anything

Surprise they aren't suing the United States of American for allowing this illegal into the country. Then they could sue which ever President was in the White House at the time of his entry into this country. Might as well sue GM for making the Suburban in the first place.

brigid_fitch: FTFA: "the suit names the parent company of Baskin-Robbins because the store's wall facing Havana was made of glass and did not have safety barriers."

What? EVERY store facing a street is basically a wall of glass. The only stores I've ever seen w/safety barriers are electronic stores like Best Buy.

Julieahni: I want to feel sorry for this family, but they are making it extremely difficult.

This. They're even suing the family of the other driver who was killed. "The family of Guntharp, who was high on methamphetamine at the time of the crash is being sued."

/Grammar fail on that sentence, though. I'm sure author meant that just Patricia Guntharp, and not her entire family, was high on meth at the time.

Actually they are suing the parents since Patricia also died in the crash.

gweilo8888: AntiNorm: Talon: If you seriously think the McD's coffee case is "frivolous" then you really don't know much of anything about the case.

The McD's coffee case is/was more meritorious than this family and their 3 y.o.

I've read all the facts in that case. There is one important fact that usually gets left out: The plaintiff in that case spilled the coffee in her own lap. Anybody with two brain cells knows that coffee is hot, and you have to be very careful with it.

That lawsuit was frivolous.

Not just spilled the coffee in her lap, but **held the cup between her knees** - which is pretty much asking to crush the cup and spill it everywhere.

Sorry, but the likes of Talon won't ever persuade me that case was anything other than frivolous. Frankly, if you're not capable of figuring out the safe method of holding a beverage which is generally made with boiling or near-boiling water, you have only yourself to blame.

What next, a lawsuit from somebody who got run over at a pedestrian crossing, because they looked up, down, and up again but didn't see any traffic coming?

We shouldn't be litigating "stupid". If you're not able to show basic common sense, you shouldn't be able to sue - because it's not exactly fair to penalize the entire rest of the country so that you don't *have* to use common sense.



People like you are what's wrong with society. "I've made up my mind. None of yer silly facts are changin' it!"

I expect you're the type who would sit on a murder trial, and say "He looks guilty."

Ha, ha. I know the lawyers who filed this lawsuit. In fact, I know the person who drafted the Complaint. They are actually very proud of the fact that they are pursuing this case despite the long odds that it will ever make it to trial. And for the sake of mankind, I pray that it gets dismissed, because the entire lawsuit is a complete crock of shiat.

At first I was like "those parents are farking idiots filing frivolous lawsuits"

Then I actually READ the article and saw that basically the parents are suing anyone who enabled an illegal immigrant to drive a car or had anything to do with allowing him to be in this country, which I can totally understand.

austin_millbarge: thenateman: Exploitingmybaby.com

Who the hell would read all that crap?

I presume it's moms, and men who really want to bang Teresa Strasser. The Parent Experiment (new window) podcast with Teresa Strasser and Lynette Carolla is #1 in "Family" section.

IonBeam2: They're suing the car dealership for selling a car to a man without a valid driver's license. What's wrong with this?

Hm. Could it be that you don't actually need a driver's license to buy a car? (Which is true)

Also, the parents haven't yet sued the dead meth head, the related car dealer, manufacturer(s), providers of HER car, the meth head's family (for not forcing her into rehab or jail), the dealer she got her meth from, any law enforcement officer who came in contract with her (for not arresting her), any law enforcement officer who came in contact with the dealer (for not arresting/deporting him as appropriate), her parole/probation officers (if any--why wasn't she in jail/rehab?); and then we can start suing more remotely involved people, like the manufacturers of each individual part of the cars (stream of commerce); the doctors and emergency personnel who didn't save the kid's life; the city, county and state for not preventing illegal immigrants and drug addicts from living in the area and being able to drive around on city streets; the United States of America for same; the descendents of the Founding Fathers; God; Satan (for allowing evil); and so on.

Hobodeluxe: I wonder if this is their lawyer?fark. There really should a requirement that you post a warning of intent before you actually post that picture. I'm thinking it should be about 5 posts up-thread. It's always such an unpleasant surprise when it emerges.

In related news, I'm now suing you, your family, Drew, anyone he knows, Drew's parents, Fark and everyone else in thread for making me see that.

oh my god, please stop talking about mcdonalds.

also, even if it's not their primary motivation, these parents must be super-vengeful. I think that if I were in that position (and i'm definitely not the vengeful type) I would want to avoid lengthy, semi-public rehashing of the event over and over in court. I think their need for vengence, or money or justice or whatever, has to be strong enough to override the desire to go grieve in peace.

proletarian: Hobodeluxe: I wonder if this is their lawyer?fark. There really should a requirement that you post a warning of intent before you actually post that picture. I'm thinking it should be about 5 posts up-thread. It's always such an unpleasant surprise when it emerges.

In related news, I'm now suing you, your family, Drew, anyone he knows, Drew's parents, Fark and everyone else in thread for making me see that.

What the fark is Fark doing to my posts that keeps causing this html fail. There was nothing wrong with it when I wrote it and it looked fine in preview.

Guess I have something else to sue everyone for.

also, a family that does meth together... I don't know, gets sued together? I don't think it was a grammar mistake, I think that whole family is probably meth-headed!

It looks to me like most of the defendants are actually guilty of one irresponsible thing or another which led to the crash. Some of them (like the city for widening the street or the baskin robbins for the glass windows) are more frivolous though.

Oh and when citing the McDs case and painting them as the bad guy its helpful to mention the self serving reason they kept coffee that hot. it had nothing to do with "research that proved customers took it to work" as their exec claimed. it was to make sure that dine in customers didnt get free refills because their first cup wasnt drinkable till about the time they were done eating.

fred_chan: Sygonus: Also, the McDonalds trial was a jury trial. If it was truly frivelous, why did twelve ordinary people award such massive damages? Shouldn't they have all realized how "excessive" it was?

I was all over this post until you said this. Juries are notoriously bad at awarding damages because they usually just pull giant numbers out of their asses depending on their mood. Notice that in the McDonald's lawsuit the jury's original $2.86 million award was reduced by the judge to just under $640,000. See also BMW of North America v. Gore, where the Supreme Court ruled that awarding $4 million in punitive damages over a coat of paint on one car was a violation of Due Process.

/Juries are dumb

It works the other way too. I know an attorney whose client was killed when a grain-hauling truck ran a red light and hit her car. The jury ruled in favor of the driver of the truck on grounds that the dead plaintiff should have known there would be lots of trucks on the road that time of year because it was harvest season.

Or my personal favorite: During jury selection in a case I was involved in, the plaintiff's attorney asked a prospective jury member about her emotions regarding the loss of a child. The prospective juror's response was that if the parent had more than one child, then it shouldn't be a big deal because the parent still has some kids who are alive. And I am NOT making this up. I was sitting right there when it happened.

Rural juries in particular are world-renowned for giving paltry awards for damages. Even in wrongful death cases they frequently award damages that are a downright insult to the family who lost a loved one. And the more conservative the county, the more pitiful the jury awards. For all their talk of "holding people accountable," conservatives are quite terrible at actually doing that (unless you're a minority or insufficiently Christian - then watch out).

noscamman: If this "undocumented" Mexicant didn't come here this tragedy wouldn't have happened. If the car dealership didn't sell the Mexicant the car then this wouldn't have happened. All those who harbor this CRIMINAL ALIEN should be held accountable.


-Combat Marine Vet


Flame on Anti-Americans.

What does being a combat vet have to do with anything related to this discussion? Oh wait, it doesn't. You just want to wrap yourself in the flag to shield yourself from criticism rather than letting your point live or die on it'd merits. Pathetic.

Go fark yourself.