Stella Liebeck and the Most Misunderstood Story

[sd'sker]

i have seen this story discussed a few times and often the facts are misrepresented. i especially get annoyed when it is used as an example of frivolous lawsuits and the need for tort reform. this story demonstrates the purpose of punitive damages and how they function. punitive damages are intended to punish the offender, it takes a lot of money to punish mcdonalds. unfortunately, people love to hate attorneys, love to think that frivolous lawsuits are rampant, and think tort reform will fix everything. so they were easily able to manipulate the facts and no one wanted to double check.

also crazy how mcdonald's really comes out ahead in this. they had to pay very little, be perceived as the victim of a justice system run amok, and have a nice framing device for a narrative people want to buy into that ultimately just protects them from liability.

Of course, it wasn't an accident that the case got blown into a national outrage. There was money to be made. McDonald's and other major corporations pushed the case as evidence that Congress needed to pass laws protecting them from lawsuits. Newt Gingrich's "Republican Revolution" championed the idea and used the Liebeck story to make their case. It's a bit of an addendum to the Van Halen Principle: tales of someone doing something unbelievably stupid or selfish or irrational are often told because they can help someone else get rich or get elected.

[NUance]

What, are you some kind a damn LAWYER or something??

[sd'sker]

What, are you some kind a damn LAWYER or something??

just a concerned coffee drinker.

[knapplc]

We had a pretty lengthy discussion on this case a few years back (scroll down a few posts to get into the discussion over this lawsuit).

 

Click Me

[GSG]

[sd'sker]

We had a pretty lengthy discussion on this case a few years back (scroll down a few posts to get into the discussion over this lawsuit).

 

Click Me

i remember that. this story has always interested me, at least ever since i heard that it was actually quite reasonable and an example of how well the justice system can work. i also find it interesting as an example of framing and narratives in news media and politics that do not serve the facts at all.

[knapplc]

[Ulty]

I remember that convo as well, and I recently watched the "Hot Coffee" documentary that the OP's video referenced. The McDonald's case is a very interesting one, always used as a scapegoat for the frivolous lawsuit debate, even though the actual facts of the case truly indicate negligence on their part.

 

"Hot Coffee" also told other stories about politicians trying to make hay out of caps on punitive damages, medicla malpractice suits and such, without said politicians or the public really understanding the facts of individual cases. I found it to be quite fascinating.