Essay on Persuasive Speech: Frivolous Lawsuits Are Out of Control

Part I: Overview of Case (who is involved and what they are arguing, as well as all possible theories, defenses, and torts involved)

Understanding that every company is at risk for lawsuits is one of the most effective ways to prevent these events from occurring. “The most important thing to prevent lawsuits is to be proactive, not reactive,” states Brad Forsyth author of Bulletproof Your Business. “The fact is most lawsuits are preventable if you proactively manage trouble and have plans already in place.”(Forsyth, 2005)

Search the Internet to find at least one news item about this lawsuit, preferably from a news source in the state in which the incident occurred.

In the last four years New York City taxpayers have paid out approximately $1 billion in awards for personal injury actions. Well over half of that amount was attributable to “pain and suffering,” a highly subjective and amorphous concept, as opposed to economic damages such as lost earnings or medical expenses. Of the total amount paid, 33 to 40 percent went to attorneys in the form of contingency fees or to experts or other in reimbursements for expenses. In FY 1977 the City’s total payout in tort actions was less than $25 million compared to $120 million in FY 1987 a mere ten year difference, and a staggering $282 million for FY 1996. Would you believe half of that money could have been used to hire 2,800 police officers or over 3,600 teachers? The time for corrective legislative action for New York has come.

In the article “Despite Counsel, Victim Is Hindered by tort laws.” The author Becca Aaronson, explains that sometimes tort laws may not feel fair. Connie Spears is just an ordinary woman who went to the Emergency because she felt some pain in her legs which she told the hospital she is known to have blood clots but, after being checked by the doctors they sent her home with a minor diagnoses. Just a short few days later she ended up in a different hospital with serious illness that caused her to loose both of her legs. She then filed a medical malpractice law suit but, she had to produce adequate expert reports within 120 days of filing their cases or she will be ordered to pay the defendants court fees. Connie Spears argues that

One such incident that explains what I mean is the case of Hazelwood v. Kulhmeier. This case was spurred when The Spectrum, Hazelwood East High School’s student-run newspaper, presented

Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 1927, the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act. I appreciate your thoughts on the issue.

Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974) was a United States Supreme Court case that defined a clear standard of First Amendment protection against instances of defamation brought by individuals who are private individuals. Four subsequent cases that have cited Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974) as precedent include the Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978); Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., 433 U.S. 562 (1977); Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30 (1983); and Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Company…….

     The legal system is an essential element in the successful operation of this country. It is a system that is utilized every day, by every type of person, from the average blue-collar worker to the average Wall Street broker. There is a multitude of ways that the legal system is put to use. One such way is the class action lawsuit. A Civil Action, by Jonathan Harr, uses the account of a single case, Anne Anderson, et al., v. W.R. Grace & Co., et al, to illustrate the power and importance of class action lawsuits in the civil justice system.

The movie, “Hot Coffee”, is a documentary film that was created by Susan Saladoff in 2011 that analyzes the impact of the tort reform on the United States judicial system. The title and the basis of the film is derived from the Liebeck v. McDonald’s restaurants lawsuit where Liebeck had burned herself after spilling hot coffee purchased from McDonald’s into her lap. The film features four different suits that may involve the tort reform. This film included many comments from politicians and celebrities about the case. There were also several myths and misconceptions on how Liebeck had spilled the coffee and how severe the burns were to her. One of the myths was that many people thought she was driving when she spilled the coffee on herself and that she suffered only minor burns, while in truth she suffered severe burns and needed surgery. This case is portrayed in the film as being used and misused to describe in conjunction with tort reform efforts. The film explained how corporations have spent millions of dollars deforming tort cases in order to promote tort reform. So in the film “Hot Coffee” it uses the case, Liebeck v. McDonalds, as an example of large corporations trying to promote the tort reform, in which has many advantages and disadvantages to the United States judicial system.

This paper will consider the facts associated with the case of Stella Liebeck versus McDonald’s, resulting from Ms. Liebeck’s efforts to collect for damages sustained when she spilled extremely hot coffee into her lap in 1992. The issues, applicable laws and the conclusion the jury reached will also be covered as well as the subsequent impacts on American tort law following this decision.

Respondent, a nationally known minister and commentator filed a suit in Federal District Court against petitioners, a nationally circulated magazine and its publisher, to recover damages for libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress arising from the publication of an advertisement "parody" which, among other things, portrayed respondent as having engaged in incest. The jury found against respondent on the libel claim, finding that the parody could not "reasonably be understood as describing actual facts . . . or events," but ruled in his favor on the emotional distress claim.

On June 13, 2013, Jennifer Nelson, American filmmaker, filed a case in federal court for the Southern District of New York against Warner Chappell Music Inc. in the name of her company Good Morning to You Production. She was directing a movie about the history of the song “Happy Birthday to You” and had to pay $1,500 to get the right to play the song. Later, a similar case was filed in the Sentral District of California, Rupa Marya v. Warmer Chappell Music Inc, No 2:13-cv-04460. These cases were later combined. Warner’s Motion to dismiss had been denied.

Tort law is a very prevalent aspect of conducting business and daily life in the twenty first century. According to the textbook, The Legal Environment of Business, tort law provides “remedies for the invasion of various protected interests.” (Cross & Miller, 2012) In this essay about tort law, I will talk about a tort case that has personally impacted me. To do so, I will provide a background of the event, apply facts of the case to applicable law, summarize lessons of the week as they relate to this case and provide a plausible argument for the parties involved.

In addition, McDonald’s has been facing a series of lawsuits and defamations. An example of such