the United States. The documentary started with a $0.49 cent cup of coffee from McDonalds that turned into a million dollar lawsuit. Stella Liebeck 79 years suffered from third degree burns from the cup of coffee she had purchased which was sold at temperatures that it shouldn’t be. The burns were so severe causing her to be hospitalized her for eight days. Liebecks family wanted McDonalds to pay for the medical bill‚ but McDonalds refused to pay the full bill causing this situation to lead court
Premium Tort
The McDonald’s hot coffee case occurred on February 27‚ 1992. Stella Liebeck‚ 79 year old woman‚ took McDonalds to court for being burned by hot coffee she purchased. While the car was not moving‚ but said to have been stopped at the time‚ Stella had the McDonalds cup of coffee between her legs and as she tried to open the lid the cup tipped over and burned her. This incident caused third degree burns on 16 percent of her body; she was hospitalized for eight days‚ had extensive skin treatment‚ skin
Premium Fast food restaurant Burn Product liability
In the Liebeck case‚ the first law that is applicable to is the tort law‚ an injury to another’s person or property (Kubasek‚ Brennan & Browne‚ 2015‚ p. 153). The tort law is applicable because Liebeck was injured as a result of being burned by McDonald’s coffee (Cain‚ 2007). These injuries gave her the right to file suit against McDonald’s in order to recuperate damages. This would be classified as a negligent tort since the injuries that Liebeck sustained are considered to
Premium Law Tort Negligence
easily fixed without any high burden to the company and would have avoided the bad publicity and expenses of the case at hand. Although Mrs. Liebeck should have taken more precaution in the matter‚ customers put their faith in a company that they will receive a safe product. Therefore‚ McDonald’s was rightly awarded majority blame and required to compensate Stella for her
Premium Law Negligence Tort
Tort Reform Legislation The Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution provides for the right to a jury trial in certain civil lawsuits. The proponents of tort reform legislation believe that in recent past there have been abuses in the civil justice system that need to be limited. In contrast‚ the opponents of the legislation believe that access to courts in order to seek remedy when deliberately or negligently harmed is vital for safeguarding individual rights. Opponents also believe
Premium Law United States Constitution Common law
It has been an ongoing issue since the 1950s‚ and as seen in the documentary “Hot Coffee”‚ most people do not know the real meaning of tort reforms. The reason for these proposed changes are based on the facts that people were getting greedy and wanted to make easy and fast money‚ thus were suing for anything they considered damaging for them. Simultaneously lawyers were taking up this opportunity to make money out of the lawsuits that were filed by their clients. Based on the publication in the
Premium
In general‚ it was believed that the business have the duty responsibility to provide products that fulfill the claims that the business explicitly made about the products on the markets to their consumers. Consumers form expectations about the products they are going to buy based on those claims and thus‚ leads them enter into a buying contract. The company has the duty to provide consumers what they pay for. However‚ consumers today were assumed to be wise‚ knowledgeable and doubtful. The doctrine
Premium Social contract Product liability Thomas Hobbes
The Need for Tort Reform in the United States Tort law is a type of law that is designed to offer remedies to civil wrongs. Unlike contractual damages that occur‚ where responsibility is predetermined‚ tort law is designed for someone who is legally injured to be able to recover damages from the person who is deemed legally responsible‚ or liable for such injuries. Tort law is broken down into three main categories‚ negligence‚ strict liability‚ and intentional tort. In negligence tort one is
Premium United States Law United States Constitution
Kimberly L. Wyche April 24‚ 2013 Case Research Assessment Dr. Toni Asterino Starcher Law 211 Intentional Tort Case The case that I researched was O.J. Simpson verses the Goldmans. Prior to this case O.J. Simpson was arrested for the murder of his Ex-wife Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman. O.J. did plead not guilty and after a 133 day trial‚ he was found to be not guilty of the crimes on October 3‚ 1995. On October 23‚ 1995 in the state of California Simpson was back in court for the wrongful
Premium Nicole Brown Simpson O. J. Simpson O. J. Simpson murder case
Gotta Love This American Ride Toby Keith is one of the best country singers of his generation and many would say one of the greatest of all time. Toby Keith has many notable awards some being‚ Entertainer of the Year‚ Album of the Year‚ Top Male Vocalist and also Video of the Year. This list keeps going on as he has won many of these awards in consecutive years. Keith started in 1993 and is still currently releasing songs today. One of Toby Keith’s song “American Ride” was released in October of
Premium Rhetoric Barack Obama