Preview

Faverty V Mcdonald’s Restaurants of Oregon, Inc. and Gacioch V Stroh Brewery Co.

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1194 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Faverty V Mcdonald’s Restaurants of Oregon, Inc. and Gacioch V Stroh Brewery Co.
Faverty v McDonald’s Restaurants of Oregon, Inc.
892 P.2D 703 (CT. APP. OR. 1995)
Facts: Matt Theurer was an 18 year old adult that worked at McDonald’s part time. His friends and family worried about him because he had many extra-curricular activities, worked for the National Guard, and worked for McDonalds. McDonald’s informal policy did not allow high school students to work more than one midnight shift per week or split shifts. There was a special clean-up week McDonald’s held, Theurer worked five nights. One night he worked until midnight, another until 11:30pm, two nights until 9pm, and another until 11pm. On Monday, April 4th, 1988, Theurer worked from 3:30 until 7:30pm, followed by the clean up shift beginning at midnight until 5am on April 5th, and then he worked another shift from 5am until 8:21am. During that shift, Theurer told his manager he was tired and asked to leave from his next regular shift. The manager accepted his request, and Theurer began to drive home. He was driving 45 miles per hour on a two lane road when he either fell asleep or became drowsy. Theurer crossed the dividing lane into on-coming traffic, and crashed into Frederic Faverty’s minivan. Theurer was killed and Faverty was seriously injured. Faverty settled his claims with Theurer’s estate, and then he filed suit against McDonald’s.
Procedure: The jury first found for Mr. Faverty. Then Faverty filed suit against McDonald’s, and McDonald’s appealed.
Issue: Is McDonald’s liable for the serious injuries done to Faverty?
Holding: Yes, McDonald’s is liable for the injuries done to Faverty.
Reasoning: Because Theurer had volunteered to work as many hours as he did, the evidence is insufficient to establish the defendant’s negligence as a matter of the law. Even assuming that Theurer had volunteered for his all-night shift, the evidence is still relevant to support the jury’s decision. The defendant concluded at trial if it had allowed someone to work that long



References: Jennings, M. M. (2009). Business: Its legal, ethical, and global environment. Mason: Cengage Learning.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    In the case of White v. Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern, Mrs. White is suing Mr. Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern in the death of her husband, Mr. White. Mr. Edward Hard was a patron of the tavern the night of the accident with Mr. and Mrs. White. Mr. Hard was in a relationship with Mrs. White before she married Mr. White. Mr. Hard saw Mr. and Mrs. White leave the tavern on this night and followed them out the door. Mrs. White observed Mr. Hard drinking several alcoholic beverages while they were there. When Mr. and Mrs. White where leaving Mr. Hard confronted Mr. White telling him that “she should be my wife” and “this is not over.” After Mr. and Mrs. White got in their car and were leaving the establishment, Mr. Hard followed them driving recklessly. He was swerving across the road, driving in the opposite lane, and hitting mailboxes. His recklessness and inability to drive due to being intoxicated resulted in him crashing into Mr. and Mrs. White’s vehicle ultimately killing Mr. White and severely injuring Mrs. White. This court case took place in United States District Court in the Northern District of Indiana. This is court case number 82A04-8876-CB285, White vs. Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern. The lawyers in this case are Benjamin Walton, Jordan Van Meter who represent the defendants Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern and Jackson Welch, Amanda Babot who represent the plaintiff Debbie White.…

    • 1382 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Description: Terry Fedrick appeals from a take nothing judgment following a bench trial. In one issue, Fedrick argues that he was entitled to a judgment as a matter of law in light of factual findings made by the trial court. We affirm. * * * Fedrick is a truck driver, and he owns a commercial truck manufactured in 1994. The truck apparently developed a short circuit in the wiring and caught fire while it was parked outside Fedrick's home. Fedrick was able to extinguish the fire, and had the truck towed to Nichols's repair facility. Nichols agreed to attempt to repair the truck. One of his employees began the repair job, but could not complete the repair because a part had not yet arrived. The truck was parked outside Nichols's facility overnight when it caught fire again and was burned beyond…

    • 691 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Facts: Darlene Jespersen was a bartender at Harrah’s Casino in Reno in the sports bar. She was frequently praised by her supervisors and customers for being an outstanding employee. When Jespersen first started her job at Harrah’s the female bartenders were not required to wear makeup but were encouraged to. Jespersen tried to wear makeup to work a few times but decided that she did not like it due to the fact it made her feel sick, degraded, exposed and violated. She also believed that it interfered with her ability to deal with unruly customers because it “took away [her] credibility…

    • 416 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Provides information on per capita consumption of beer in both the national scale and in Delaware.…

    • 861 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    History: Federal Trade Commission instituted a deceptive advertising proceeding against Kraft Inc. Kraft was instructed to terminate certain ads due to false advertising.…

    • 297 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Procedure: Plaintiff Katko filed suit against Briney in Mahaska District Court seeking damages for injury suffered by defendant. After trial by jury and in accordance with jury verdict, Court awarded plaintiff actual and punitive damages. Court denied defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for new trial. Defendant appealed.…

    • 320 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Issue: Did the court of appeals use the right “standard of review” to change the jury’s facts of who was liable and who was at fault.…

    • 569 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Michael Harrison Jr. the plaintiff filed a complaint with the EEOC against the defendant Killeen Fast- Food Restaurant (Wendy’s) for refusal to hire him based on his hearing impairment despite his qualifications. The EEOC filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas Waco Division, the general manager of the restaurant refused to hire…

    • 746 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Since its creation in the late 18th century, the Supreme Court has made numerous decisions that impacted the course of history. The Supreme Court has a very important job, to interpret the constitution principles and make decisions based on these important standards. Had it not been for the rulings made by this court, many laws and precedents may not have been adapted. One case that had an exceptionally important impact on history was the case of Muller vs. Oregon. This case is one of the most influential decisions in Supreme Court history and its impacts are still seen even today.…

    • 1033 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This court case took place in the United States Supreme Court in the Northern District of Indiana. The plaintiff in this court case is Deborah White, represented by Amanda Babbitt and Jackson Walsh. The defendants are Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern, represented by Benjamin Walton and Jordon Van Meter. Deborah White brought this court case to the Supreme Court in order to argue against the summary judgment filed by the defendents. A summary judgment is granted only if all of the written evidence before the court clearly establishes that there are no disputed issues of material fact and that the party who requested the summary…

    • 401 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Yunker V. Honeywell

    • 1061 Words
    • 5 Pages

    3. The court in this case rejected the negligent hiring claim because of previous case law. In the Ponticas case of 1983, the court defined negligent hiring as, “predicated on the negligence of an employer in placing a person with knowing propensities, or propensities which should have been discovered by reasonable investigation, in an employment position in which, because of the circumstances of the employment, it should have been foreseeable that the hired individual posed a threat of injury to others” (McAdams, 2007, pg. 457). “Because of this definition under Ponticas, Honeywell argued that it should not be held liable for negligent hiring because, unlike providing a dangerous resident manager with a passkey, Landin’s employment did not enable him to commit the act of violence against Nesser” (McAdams, 2007, pg. 457).…

    • 1061 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Law 421 week 2 work

    • 1527 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Ms Liebeck spilled her coffee on herself which caused her to get burned. She sustained 3rd degree burns because the coffee was brewed at a higher temperature than other restaurants. The case was ruled in favor of Ms. Liebeck. The jury declared McDonald’s negligent because their coffee was found to be 20 degrees hotter than it should have been. McDonald’s had received many complaints about their coffee being too hot and failed to do anything about it. So their actions were considered to be reckless because they did not warn their customers about the temperature of the…

    • 1527 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Dillon V. Jogbra

    • 1383 Words
    • 6 Pages

    References: Jennings, M. M. (2006). Business: Its legal, ethical, and global environment (7th Ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.…

    • 1383 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism in McDonald v. City of Chicago Judicial Restraint is when the Supreme Court restricts their powers to avoid making any changes to public policy, unless that policy is unconstitutional. When applying judicial restraint to cases, the courts stand by stare decisis (previous decisions of the court), uphold current law, and hold strictly to the text of the Constitution. They think that by only interpreting the constitution and not creating new laws, that they are preserving the laws that this country was founded on. Judicial activism is the opposite.…

    • 685 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Good evening Your Honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, and opposing counsel. Tonight you heard the testimony and evidence in Roughed Grouse High School's attempt to hide, justify, and deny their negligent actions. In order to prove Roughed Grouse High School's negligence resulting in the death of Jordan Simon, I, along with my co-counsel, had to prove our case, not beyond a reasonable doubt, but simply by a preponderance of evidence. In other words, if you were to put the evidence favoring the case of the plaintiff and evidence favorable to the defendant on a scale, we the plaintiff would have to make the scales tip ever so slightly in our favor. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we have done just that. We have proved to you tonight by a preponderance of evidence, not that the defendant was solely responsible for the unfortunate and untimely death of Jordan Simon, but that those representing Roughed Grouse High School were more negligent above all others involved.…

    • 954 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays