{paginate}
4 of 4
4
{/paginate}
Man says hold the cheese, claims McDonald’s didn’t, sues for $10 million
Posted: 15 August 2007 01:24 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  154
Joined  2006-03-12

Honestly, if I was deathly allergic to something as visible as a slice of cheese on a hamburger… I would definately check before I put anything in my mouth.  Mcdonalds cheese isnt exactly invisible, its usually BRIGHT orange.

How embarassing would it be to die to a slice of cheese? (If I died that way.. I’d expect it to be put on my tombstone as a lesson to others…  Here lies Emi, lost to a square of cheese-food-product, remember to check your hamburgers kids!)

Now I could understand if they ground the cheese up with the meat, or used some sort of dairy based additives that were not advertised, hidden allergens, like those evil peanuts tend to be.

Personal responsibility?  Its too easy to blame someone else nowadays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 August 2007 09:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Senior Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  404
Joined  2005-10-26

Australia was talking about bringing in a ‘pay legal cost of other party’ rule. Obviously the lawyers opposed it, so I’m not sure it took off.
It meant that if you went to a lawyer with a bonehead lawsuit(like this one) the lawyer couldnt offer you a ‘no win no fee’ deal. Well, they could, but the lawyer would be charged all the legal costs of the defendant. That tends to make them do a bit of an assessment first before taking on a silly case. I doubt very much in any of these moron lawsuits that we hear about the they have put any money down to secure the services of the lawyer beforehand.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 August 2007 11:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1318
Joined  2007-05-06
Kathleen - 14 August 2007 06:05 PM

I believe in the coffee case it was proved that McDonald’s at the time (at least this particular McDonald’s) actually kept its coffee many degrees hotter than even the typical fast-food restaurant—I can’t remember the exact number, but it was a lot hotter, maybe as much as 20 degrees. So if she was expecting, say Burger King’s temp and got McDonalds’ temp, well, she had a big shock.

Also, If I remember correctly, originally the lady who made the complaint asked only for McDonald’s to pay her medical expenses (which were pretty high, what with several skin grafts and so on), and McDonald’s turned her down flat. Maybe that’s why they made the offer so quickly in this case.

Kathleen, that’s true. Furthermore, McDonald’s had already had this brought to their attention multiple times and this wasn’t the first lawsuit. The case became a Tort issue basically because McDonald’s was just repeatedly ignoring the major problem they had with their coffee.

The McDonald’s coffee case really isn’t what people make it out to be.

Conversely, here we have a guy who is deathly allergic to something, knows it is part of the (unaltered) item he ordered, and didn’t even freaking look to see if it was on there. Totally different.

 Signature 

So I can just type anything and it will show up here?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 August 2007 10:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3214
Joined  2007-05-18

Oh, I agree. The McDonald’s coffee case is most people’s favorite example of a frivolous lawsuit, but when you read more about it, it really wasn’t frivolous at all. McDonald’s needed a hard lesson, and it finally got it. Good for the jury, I say.

The other thing people do is bring up nutcase suits that have been filed as proof of how the courts have gone mad…forgetting or not realizing that just because a case is filed, that doesn’t mean that the person who filed the suit won so much as a nickel. An awful lot of these things never go anywhere after that first flurry of media attention.

I just don’t get it. There are real examples out there, so why not use them? Of course, that would require doing a little bit of checking around (which is so hard to do with the Internet, hahaha) instead of just passing along something you heard from your brother-in-law or some radio talk show…

P.S. By the way, when I made that smarty-butt crack about “something you heard from your brother-in-law,” I didn’t mean anybody here. Everybody who’s contributed to this thread has made thoughtful comments that require, as far as I can tell, considerably more than just the typical “Well, I heard [insert five-word headline here].”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 August 2007 10:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7356
Joined  2005-06-23

I personally read the McDonalds coffe case and it’s heavily under-emphasised. Like Transformer thought- he assumed it was just ‘hot coffee’.

Scalding coffee which is extremely dangerous to serve. And her crotch area was severely burned.

This guy had an onus on himself to check something obvious. It’s impossible not to see the cheese unlike nut traces or something similar.

And like Kathleen said “a man sued McDonalds…” just means he filed the suit. 99% of suits like that go nowhere. Courts won’t stand for it. And it damages people’s view of the legal system.

People honestly wouldn’t use lawyers at all at this rate if we weren’t totally indispensible tongue wink

 Signature 

“We look to Scotland for all our ideas of civilisation.”
- Voltaire

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 August 2007 12:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  8385
Joined  2005-04-17

Almost everyone is allergic to something to some degree. 

My little brother was a ‘bubble’ baby-he was allergic to so many products, foods and chemicals and natural flora and fauna that it was many years before he could eat at any place that served fast portions of anything.  All his drinks and foods had to be carefully prepared by my mother and all ingredients had to be viewed cautiously.  Everything he came in contact with had to be almost sterile.  I hated it. 

Any individual who has deadly allergic reactions to anything must be extremely cautious and would NEVER place their life in the hands of a stranger who is handling substances that are ‘poison’ to that particular individual.

Responsibility begins with the individual.  If they choose to flirt with death, their flirtation could be a wish for death by someone else’s hand and that could be determined a criminal offense.

 Signature 

SilentTone: hulitoons blog of just plain silliness?
UBUNTU’ in the Xhosa culture means: ‘I am because we are.)”  So, I AM because WE are

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 August 2007 12:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7356
Joined  2005-06-23
hulitoons - 16 August 2007 04:45 PM

Almost everyone is allergic to something to some degree. 

My little brother was a ‘bubble’ baby-he was allergic to so many products, foods and chemicals and natural flora and fauna that it was many years before he could eat at any place that served fast portions of anything.  All his drinks and foods had to be carefully prepared by my mother and all ingredients had to be viewed cautiously.  Everything he came in contact with had to be almost sterile.  I hated it. 

Any individual who has deadly allergic reactions to anything must be extremely cautious and would NEVER place their life in the hands of a stranger who is handling substances that are ‘poison’ to that particular individual.

Responsibility begins with the individual.  If they choose to flirt with death, their flirtation could be a wish for death by someone else’s hand and that could be determined a criminal offense.

Technically you can be liable if your small or trivial actions kill someone with any form of disprder or weakness that you didn’t know about. Eggshell Skull rule- the idea that if you give a guy a little punch without knowing his skull is as fragile as an eggshell and that punch kills him, you still murdered him.

However when the person in question has a serious allergy and does not communicate the seriousness of it and doesn’t check for himself, well then he can’t have been taking it too seriously now can he?

 Signature 

“We look to Scotland for all our ideas of civilisation.”
- Voltaire

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 August 2007 12:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6453
Joined  2004-11-08
gray - 14 August 2007 04:03 PM

Here is a list of the ingredients in the cheese they use on their stuff.  With all the processing that goes on I’m not sure how much of the original allery causing substances of milk there are left in it.

Processed Cheese Slice: Cheese (milk, modified milk ingredients, bacterial culture, salt, calcium chloride, microbial
enzyme, lipase), modified milk ingredients, water, sodium citrate and/or sodium phosphate, salt, potassium sorbate,
citric acid, colour, soy lecithin.

But with someone who is lactose intolerent…it’s not even simply “dairy” products that cause problems.  The sugar in milk (called LACTOSE) cannot be digested properly by someone who is lactose intolerant.  Some processes will reduce or take out the lactose.  Jason can handle some cheeses & yogurts.  But especially the “processed cheese food” contains basic milk that has had little done to it, other than adding it to an orange powder.  So, it’s likely the cheese slice singles that get added to the hamburgers would cause MORE problems than if Jason ate a very hard, natural romano cheese.  Ice cream is the same way.  Plain MILK added to other ingredients and mixed.

If I cook milk, Jason also has less of a problem with it.

 Signature 

I’m loving the puppies.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 August 2007 02:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1624
Joined  2006-05-20

I admit that I haven’t read the story, but I sure don’t understand where the $10 million could come from.  Is he claiming to have suffered some sort of permanent disability where he can’t work ever again?

Even if he wins, he’s got to expect a judgment of partial liability for failing to look at the burger before eating it.  Blindly sticking it in his mouth doesn’t seem to jibe with the care he is claiming to have taken in placing the order.  Also, it’s really common for fast-food places, especially McD’s, to screw up orders.  (I have yet to get a plain iced-tea from them since they added their nasty sweetened tea.  I’m zero for three attempts, and I usually do everything I possibly can to ensure that they understand what I want.)

He’s not claiming lactose intolerance is he?  I thought it was an actual allergy.  Lactose intolerance just means he doesn’t produce enough (or any) lactase for breaking down lactose.  I think it results in an upset tummy, not a life-threatening event.

 Signature 

The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head.

  —Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

[color=green]“That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 August 2007 02:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1624
Joined  2006-05-20

When I worked as an interpreter for the Deaf, I did most of a student’s law school.  I remember they discussed the coffee burn case, and the facts were really nothing like they were reported in the media.  Unfortunately, about all I remember is that the coffee they used back then was intentionally kept exceedingly hot because it was really cheap stuff (I think it was that pre-brewed junk that comes frozen in a plastic bag).  It tasted horrible when served at a reasonable temperature.  Also, the woman was only trying to get her medical bills paid (I think there were skin grafts), but McD’s really blew her off.  The lawyers discovered that this was part of a pattern—that McD’s had blown off numerous complaints about the issue.  The jury was sympathetic to the woman and apparently angered at McD’s arrogance, so they awarded an absurdly huge judgment which was later reduced by the judge.

This is from my less-than-reliable memory, but the sense I got was that the real story wasn’t too much like the story as reported.

 Signature 

The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head.

  —Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

[color=green]“That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 August 2007 07:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7356
Joined  2005-06-23
JoeDaJuggler - 18 August 2007 06:36 PM

When I worked as an interpreter for the Deaf, I did most of a student’s law school.  I remember they discussed the coffee burn case, and the facts were really nothing like they were reported in the media.  Unfortunately, about all I remember is that the coffee they used back then was intentionally kept exceedingly hot because it was really cheap stuff (I think it was that pre-brewed junk that comes frozen in a plastic bag).  It tasted horrible when served at a reasonable temperature.  Also, the woman was only trying to get her medical bills paid (I think there were skin grafts), but McD’s really blew her off.  The lawyers discovered that this was part of a pattern—that McD’s had blown off numerous complaints about the issue.  The jury was sympathetic to the woman and apparently angered at McD’s arrogance, so they awarded an absurdly huge judgment which was later reduced by the judge.

This is from my less-than-reliable memory, but the sense I got was that the real story wasn’t too much like the story as reported.

I read a lot, and I mean a lot, of cases for the Law School, and the media rarely gets it correct. They take facts and try to dramatise them.

Law isn’t really that exciting LOL

 Signature 

“We look to Scotland for all our ideas of civilisation.”
- Voltaire

Profile
 
 
   
{paginate}
4 of 4
4
{/paginate}