1. Describe the company and the product safety issue that led to the lawsuit The name of this case in this report is the Liebeck v. McDonald’s. Restaurants and the court in which the lawsuit was filed was The Second Judicial District Court in Bernalillo County, New Mexico. The lawsuit was filed with the original complaint was filed on March 21, 1993, and the plaintiff only sued P. T. S. , Inc. , a New Mexico corporation and the local franchise operator.
“McDonald’s coffee spill” tort case became a widely known court case in the United States and internationally. When this case appeared on the news it was it brought a lot of attention and made a mockery of by radio talk-show hosts, television and newspaper editors around the world and throughout the United States in a case where a 79 year old women spilling hot McDonald’s coffee on herself while in a car as a result of it is she than sued McDonald’s receiving a cool 2. 9 million dollars from a jury that showed sympathy in the situation.
The first McDonald’s restaurant opened in San Bernardino, California by Richard and Maurice McDonald in 1948 and since then McDonald has become the world’s leading food service organization generating more than $40 billion in system wide sale and operating over thirty thousand restaurants in more than one hundred countries on six continents. The Liebeck case became a story widely known to considerate number of law suits that were meaningless, quarrelsome plaintiffs and juries that were out of control in the U S.
In fueling “tort reform “ it was used as a major weapon in the United States, and in foreign countries in opposing or favoring legal changes leading to or avoid, respectively, the excesses and dysfunction of the United States’ tort litigation system. In the decision of this case of the United States 1994 election campaigns “tort reform” there was a large platform in the Republican Party’s support and “Contract with America. ” Advocates in this case regularly and constantly discussed tort reform during and after campaigns, as landslides in the elections gathered Republicans control, the U.
S. Congress and state legislatures, tort reform became one of the major items in legislative program. A magazine called Newsweek labeled Stella Liebeck’s situation as the “poster lady” that was unwilling for the tort reform movement and in Washington, D. C. , where local media was filled with political advertisements referring to the McDonald’s coffee-spill horror-story finally pushed through a federal product liability law giving
one hundred percent in efforts in the United States where Liebeck case was used as a valuable source in efforts of state-law tort-reforms. In this case Mrs. Liebeck wasn’t driving the car the time the coffee spilled on her. The coffee was between her knees at the time and was taking the top off to pour cream and sugar into it, and while at a stop in the parking lot in the front passenger seat while removing the lid, the whole cup of coffee spilled onto Mrs Liebeck’s sweatpants were it absorbed through her pants held next to her skin.
The coffee purchase resulted in severe excruciatingly pain and suffering of third-degree burns to over 6 percent of her body to her groin, thighs and buttocks , multiple surgical skin grafts, a seven days at the hospital stay and medical bills totaling $200,000. Ms Lieback had never filed a lawsuit and didn’t have any intentions but McDonald’s refused to help her pay any of her medical bills after just asking for $20,000 to pay some of her bills. All McDonald’s wanted to offer was no more than a merely $800 so of course this case went to trial. 2.
Discuss the legal theories used by the plaintiff to recover in this lawsuit, how the lawsuit was resolved, and why you agree with the decision in the case During the trial the jury made a decision in Mrs. Liebeck being partially responsible and as a result compensation was reduced for her injuries. Having over 700 reports throughout the country there was coffee burn claims filed against McDonalds before Mrs Liebeck initial claim they were more than aware that their coffee was burning people and settled out for over $500,000 of burn injuries prior to this case.
The tactics in this case blamed Mrs. Liebeck for her injuries, claiming knowledge of not being as quick enough in taking off her pants after the coffee had spilled. There were also arguments in questioning with Mrs. Liebeck’s age playing a role in this incident in causing her injuries to be worse than a younger person since older people’s skin is thinner. There was talk in reference in this case as being intentional when this coffee was heated up to 190 F and having knowledge of rules in regulation in accordance to other restaurants heating coffee to temperatures of 160 F that is safe.
It was said that the coffee was so boiling hot that it had potential risk of burning off skin resulting in damages to bones and muscles in a matter of a blink of an eye. As the case proceeded it was noted that the quality assurance manager of McDonald’s was forced admitting that the Corporation was well aware of risks in serving coffee that was not safe, but ignored finding alternatives of actually preventing this from happening.
There was questioning in the fact of why McDonald’s coffee was made so hot and if it poses danger in customers being burned what type of decision could have been made in temperature reduction of this product. The answered to this question was answered as the trial unfolded. The requirements of McDonalds co? ee is made at temperatures that are scalding hot and these choices were made by consultants who specialized in coffee products and groups in these industries allegations of how it important for temperatures to be hot in order to get the full effect of extracting actual ?
avor of the coffee beans while the coffee brews. In a six day deliberation of a jury of women and men they came to a conclusion determining this product being very dangerous, and sold breach of the implied warranty of fitness imposed by the Uniform Commercial Code and was unfit for consumption and that McDonald’s coffee caused enough chaos that no one should suffer pain from exposure from the selling of extremely hot coffee at McDonald’s or other restaurants.
After careful deliberation McDonald was found by the jury in the engagement of conduct that was careless, resentful and driven. The jurors agreed on an award of 2. 7 million dollars in punitive damage against McDonald’s in comparence to two days of 1. 3 million dollars generated daily from coffee in revenue and 1 billion cups of coffee being sold each year. A day after the verdict a local reporter took it upon his self in going to the establishment where Mrs.
Liebeck was served and tested some coffee and founding it to be a 158 degrees in which I would be pretty sure to be in between of which would be the optimum temp in avoiding another law suit from hot coffee. It was a proven fact that they knew that the temperatures of the coffee was served hot but research from marketing showed customers of McDonalds coffee wanted not only hot but steaming hot coffee and had expectations of it being that way.
This than signaled doubt within companywide changes according to officials due to a last year series of focus groups of customers who buys coffee weekly from McDonald’s saying that coffee in the morning requirements isn’t so much of taste but to be hot but not to a point where its steaming Describe the changes that have taken place in the company to ensure greater safety of this product or its products After the aftermath of the Liebeck lawsuit McDonalds has taken some measures in ensuring safety of their products with Many McDonald’s drive-thrus posting warning signs of
hot chocolate, co? ee, and tea stating that its “very hot” Also McDonald’s lids having hot beverage cups engraved with words saying hot, hot, hot It was still controversial in conclusion to the case of McDonald’s coffee being served co? ee cooler than the coffee that harmed Ms. Liebeck. Specialist have indicated the policy current to serving hot co? ee should be 175-195 degrees Fahrenheit and that guidelines have continued to call for the best-tasting co? ee to be near boiling temperatures.
Lawsuits to the current reaction to co? ee showed performances in practicing improvement in job warnings but also maintaining temperatures for purposes of quality tasting and cooked foods served while hot. The company or restaurant should serve foods in heavy containers to avoid possible harm to the customer and of course themselves and alerting of any products have been taken out of the oven. Discuss which regulatory agency oversees the particular industry the company is in. The U.
S FDA is an agency that oversees all companies that processes, pack, and manufactures stores food, a dietary supplements beverage that is consumed in the United States. The U. S. FDA Food Safety Services and the FDA Food Safety Modernization enacted in 2011 required the FDA to undertake new missions in preventing outbreaks of foodborne illness before occurring and originating in food facilities outside the United States. There are more than 3,000 states, agencies locally and tribal having responsibilities in regulating food services and food retail industries in the US.
Their responsibilities include inspections and oversights of more than one million food establishments like restaurants, grocery stores, vending machines, cafeterias, and other outlets in health-care facilities. The Food and Drug Administration aims in promoting safety principles that are science-based food applications of retail and foods service settings in minimizing foodborne illness occurrences. Food safety management systems take multiple forms in establishing sets and patterns of procedures that can described as “the way we do things.
” Some organizations have put in place food safety management systems in controlling food preparation methods and monitoring processes to their operation. Regulating food safety integrated into any operation have impacts on business actions in taking in and opening up in the morning, ensuring profits and managing cash flows. By putting in place active systems that are ongoing having the outcome of actions for purposes of creating outcomes you desire and also achieve goals of improving food safety.
FDA supports food safety management systems in retail and food service establishments and with integrating proper sanitation, an employee training program that’s effective and prerequisite programs, HACCP provides an adequate food safety management system for any establishment. Make recommendations to the company about avoiding future lawsuits. McDonald’s has engaged in deceptive advertising, sales, and promotion produced food that was unreasonably unsafe; and failed to warn consumers of the dangers of its products. It’s very easy to make a product or service more appealing than the normal with false advertising.
This type of marketing practice is very common in American society even though this type of advertising is not approving by the population majority. False advertising is dangerous to our current economy to people where money is not to be disposed or thrown away unnecessarily. Having power to convict the FTC in essence to stop false advertising their biggest issue presented is the amount of false advertising that is happening. Avoid producing food that’s unsafe with having a safe food supply despite the fact that at any point in time contamination can occur in food.
In processing foodservices it starts in the fields and straight to people’s plate foodborne illnesses is caused from eating contaminated food or consuming contaminated drinks. It is estimated that each year in the U. S that there are 76 million food poisoning and statistics showing 400 to 500 foodborne illness have occurred yearly. Many in the industry are already taking responsibility. Establishments now are becoming conscious based upon overseeing, regulating, and establishing policies and custom forms to business operators and employees in taking cautions in avoiding foodborne illnesses and organizational food safety promotions
