& Savage, 2010, pg 251). In order to prove an intentional tort, the following conditions must be met: 1) Intent 2) Voluntary act by the defendant 3) Causation 4) Injury or Harm. The following tort cases, Pearson v. Chung and Liebeck v. McDonalds, have been a pinnacle “poster child” for tort reform in the United States. In 2002, frivolous lawsuits cost taxpayers over $233 billion (Insideprison.com, 2006). What is considered a frivolous lawsuit? It is when an attorney
Liebeck v. McDonald’s, also known as the McDonald’s Coffee Case, is a 1994 product liability lawsuit. This lawsuit became one of the most famous in the US history because after the court’s awarded Stella Liebeck $2.9 million, after she was severely burned by the coffee she brought from McDonald, there were debates over tort reform in the US. Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman was in the passenger seat of her grandson’s car, while she ordered a coffee from McDonald’s. Liebeck’s nephew parked
In February 22, 1992 a man by the name of Chris pulls his 1989 Ford Probe into the drive-thru of an Albuquerque, New Mexico McDonalds. Chris ordered a coffee for his grandmother, 79-year-old Stella Liebeck. Upon receiving the coffee Chris pulls into a parking space so Stella can introduce cream and sugar to her coffee. A 1989 Ford Probe lacks cupholders and features a slanted dashboard. Thus, Stella placed the coffee near her lap and opened the Styrofoam lid. At that moment, 180-degree liquid saturated
Court’s decision in DC vs. Heller, a 76 year old Chicago resident named Otis McDonald looked to remove a City of Chicago ban on handguns which was similar to that in the District of Columbia. Joined by three other Chicago residents, Adam Orlov, and Colleen and David Lawson, McDonald and his colleges filed a suit against the citywide ban of handguns, and eventually became know as McDonald vs. City of Chicago. McDonald vs. City of
1.) When there is a case that a particular interest group has interest in, comes before the court, a group has the option to file an amicus curiae brief to better present the groups breakdown of the case. Now the impact that amicus curiae can have is that it brings policy perspective to the courts in a way that a party’s own individual brief may be unable to do so (White). The amicus curiae briefs serve an effective purpose of advocating for special interest groups and in public business affairs
Jesus Eliseo Mr. Hunt Government 12/10/2015 Media Report Gun Legislation Gun control has been a very controversial topic lately because theirs has been definitely a lot of shootings in US recently. People believe that being owner of a gun is a constitutional right because of the second amendment. So any person should be allowed to purchase a firearm legally without no problem. One huge problem that has been happening recently this years is how guns have become too dangerous because people are using
The right to bear arms has been around since the beginning of our great nation and has not changed very much over the last couple of centuries. In 2015 there were 595,930 deaths caused by cancer in the United States (“Number of Deaths for Leading Causes of Deaths”). Did you know that compared to the astronomical number of cancer deaths, there were only 13,286 gun-related deaths in the United States in the same year (“Guns in the US: The Statistics Behind the Violence”)? There are a copious amount
McDonald v. Chicago is a very simple case, but not one of little importance. Someone believed their rights have been infringed upon and took out a lawsuit. In this particular case the question is because of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges and Immunities and or Due Process Clauses, does the Second Amendment apply to the states(oyez). This means do the states hold the right as an equal individual to “keep and bear arms” (wiki 3). District of Columbia v. Heller was a similar court case ruling
Pearson and McDonald’s Lawsuit Analysis Samantha Penico University of Maryland University College, AMBA 610 Executive Summary There are two major lawsuits which the main populace has defined as frivolous. One of those cases is the McDonald’s split coffee case. This is the case where the plaintiff spilled her coffee and was rumored to sue McDonald’s for 2.7 million dollars and win. The other’s case is the Pearson dry cleaning case where a man sued Chung Dry Cleaner’s 54 million dollars for
through the three interviews conducted that two out of three people don’t necessarily understand the full concept of tort reform or have absolutely no idea what it is. One of the most notorious cases that led to the ongoing debate of tort reform is Liebeck v. Mcdonald’s Restaurant. When the case is brought up, one will say, “Isn’t that the lady that burned herself with coffee and then tried to sue for millions of dollars?” People believe they know the details of the case, however one will be able to