Submitted by Guest1 (not verified) on Tue, 03/20/2012 - 1:10pm.
The example about the McDonalds lawsuit is based upon ignorance.
This was not a minor or trivial injury. The scalding-hot coffee caused third-degree burns over 16% of the plaintiff's body, including her genital area. She was a 79 year-old grandmother. She had to be hospitalized for eight days. She required extensive skin grafts and was permanently scarred. She was disabled for a period of two years. During the ensuing trial, her physician testified that her injury was one of the worst cases of scalding he’d ever seen.
During the litigation, McDonald’s was required to produce corporate documents of similar cases. More than 700 claims had been made against McDonald’s, and many of the victims had suffered third-degree burns similar to the Plaintiff's. Yet the company had refused to change its policy, supposedly because a consultant had recommended the high temperature as a way to maintain optimum taste.
Finally, the Plaintiff was clearly not motivated by greed in this case. Despite the pain caused by her injury, and the lengthy and expensive treatments she required, Plaintiff originally offered to settle with McDonald’s for $20,000. The corporation offered her a mere $800, so the case went to trial.
Response to McDonalds Lawsuit Comment
The example about the McDonalds lawsuit is based upon ignorance.
This was not a minor or trivial injury. The scalding-hot coffee caused third-degree burns over 16% of the plaintiff's body, including her genital area. She was a 79 year-old grandmother. She had to be hospitalized for eight days. She required extensive skin grafts and was permanently scarred. She was disabled for a period of two years. During the ensuing trial, her physician testified that her injury was one of the worst cases of scalding he’d ever seen.
During the litigation, McDonald’s was required to produce corporate documents of similar cases. More than 700 claims had been made against McDonald’s, and many of the victims had suffered third-degree burns similar to the Plaintiff's. Yet the company had refused to change its policy, supposedly because a consultant had recommended the high temperature as a way to maintain optimum taste.
Finally, the Plaintiff was clearly not motivated by greed in this case. Despite the pain caused by her injury, and the lengthy and expensive treatments she required, Plaintiff originally offered to settle with McDonald’s for $20,000. The corporation offered her a mere $800, so the case went to trial.
Get your facts straight.