Hot Coffee Reaction Paper
Alex Garcia
Sociology 002
12:10-1:35
5/21/2014
“HOT COFFEE”
REACTION ESSAY
After watching the documentary “Hot Coffee,” I realized that it greatly explained how one incident started a domino effect that shook up the way Government protects big business forever. I strongly believe that Tort reform was meant to back big business and take away the rights of Americans who are wronged by these corporations. From a sociologist standpoint I can especially see the concerns of a conflict theorist because this is capitalism at its best. When Stella Liebeck sued McDonalds for a cup of hot coffee that she spilled on herself, a lot of people originally viewed the situation as a joke and as a plan for someone to get rich quick. Before watching the documentary I had no knowledge of the incident and thought it sounded like a case of lawsuit abuse. Soon after watching, I saw the negligence of McDonalds by not monitoring the temperature of the coffee and the major damage done to Stella’s skin. The medical bills were major and she deserved not only compensation for medical bills but punitive damages as well. She was awarded 160,000 dollars in damages and 2.7 million in punitive damages (eventually reduced to 480,000). After such an infamous case, it opened the floodgates for other Americans to go after businesses that had wronged them. In a case for Stella, the lawsuit was justified, but there were cases across the country were lawsuits were filed and many were trying to “get rich quick.” Sure it is a controversial situation but Tort Reform was used a defense mechanism for big business. Companies like tobacco corporations for example, were actually behind lawsuit abuse groups trying to help spark tort reform to favor them. They had all the money to back political campaigns for nominees that would favor tort reform. This I believe is a matter of capitalism because the rich are investing in themselves and are literally fixing campaigns by funding
Sociology 002
12:10-1:35
5/21/2014
“HOT COFFEE”
REACTION ESSAY
After watching the documentary “Hot Coffee,” I realized that it greatly explained how one incident started a domino effect that shook up the way Government protects big business forever. I strongly believe that Tort reform was meant to back big business and take away the rights of Americans who are wronged by these corporations. From a sociologist standpoint I can especially see the concerns of a conflict theorist because this is capitalism at its best. When Stella Liebeck sued McDonalds for a cup of hot coffee that she spilled on herself, a lot of people originally viewed the situation as a joke and as a plan for someone to get rich quick. Before watching the documentary I had no knowledge of the incident and thought it sounded like a case of lawsuit abuse. Soon after watching, I saw the negligence of McDonalds by not monitoring the temperature of the coffee and the major damage done to Stella’s skin. The medical bills were major and she deserved not only compensation for medical bills but punitive damages as well. She was awarded 160,000 dollars in damages and 2.7 million in punitive damages (eventually reduced to 480,000). After such an infamous case, it opened the floodgates for other Americans to go after businesses that had wronged them. In a case for Stella, the lawsuit was justified, but there were cases across the country were lawsuits were filed and many were trying to “get rich quick.” Sure it is a controversial situation but Tort Reform was used a defense mechanism for big business. Companies like tobacco corporations for example, were actually behind lawsuit abuse groups trying to help spark tort reform to favor them. They had all the money to back political campaigns for nominees that would favor tort reform. This I believe is a matter of capitalism because the rich are investing in themselves and are literally fixing campaigns by funding