They are the fact-finders and decision-makers after weighing all of the evidence - evidence and facts that are often not known to the public or reported in news headlines. The judge and jury are presented with all of the evidence, testimony, and law in a case. However, every case has its own facts and evidence serving as the basis for how a specific verdict or settlement is reached. News headlines often spin lawsuits as being frivolous or juries as runaway. ![]() Liebeck’s treating physician, the 79-year-old’s burns were some of the worst scald burns he had ever seen. The Plaintiff’s Burns Were Substantial.Īccording to Ms.Injuries included burns to the “genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks.” For ten years, McDonald’s had seen hundreds of reports of customers receiving third-degree burns after spilling coffee, but they did nothing. The Judge found the chain’s conduct regarding the sale of scalding hot coffee and failure to warn customers about the risk of harm if spilled was callous. The Court refused to grant McDonald’s request for a new trial. McDonald’s Conduct Was Considered “Callous.”.Punitive damages were later reduced by a trial judge to $480,000 however, the parties agreed to a “post-verdict settlement.” The confidential agreement prevented further appeals, which could have taken years to resolve. A Judge Later Significantly Reduced the Punitive Damages. ![]() Eventually, a jury would award the plaintiff $200,000 in compensatory damages (reduced by 20% as she was found to be partially at fault for her injuries) and $2.7 million in punitive damages. McDonald’s initially refused to settle the case.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |