The documentary Hot Coffee, directed by Susan Saladoff, exposes the ideas and reasons behind the so-called “frivolous lawsuits”. Most of the arguments being made in this film are left open-ended and allow you to see both sides of the whole argument without being one sided towards either.
One of the first examples that were given was the McDonalds vs. Stella Liebeck case. Throughout the explanation, the narrator speaks of the case that was given in between the clips of media surrounding the case. The McDonalds Hot Coffee case was one to set the stage for a “jackpot justice”. The media tended to use the public relations versions instead of the court evidence so that it seemed it would be Stella Liebeck was in fact at fault for the incident. When the evidence for the case was revealed it seemed to prove against to the media’s stories. Highlighting the public relations spins, the …show more content…
The clause in her contract she was denied a case by jury but was forced to take her case in a discrete arbitration.
In the end, the documentary brings to light the fact that most people are not creating these so-called “frivolous lawsuits” because they want to win a large cash reward, but because they want to hold the wrong doer’s accountable. Many who vote for the laws that allow caps on compensation seem not to take into account that companies do wrong to people occasionally.
Know the laws in your state, and what they entail. Read any contract you sign, and always question your social media. This film points out just a few of the flaws that can happen both in social media and in the legal system. If each person doesn’t take action for themselves, who will? With just an extra bit of pathos and just enough logos, this film would be suggested for anyone of or entering voting age who is looking to see what happens to their
One of the first examples that were given was the McDonalds vs. Stella Liebeck case. Throughout the explanation, the narrator speaks of the case that was given in between the clips of media surrounding the case. The McDonalds Hot Coffee case was one to set the stage for a “jackpot justice”. The media tended to use the public relations versions instead of the court evidence so that it seemed it would be Stella Liebeck was in fact at fault for the incident. When the evidence for the case was revealed it seemed to prove against to the media’s stories. Highlighting the public relations spins, the …show more content…
The clause in her contract she was denied a case by jury but was forced to take her case in a discrete arbitration.
In the end, the documentary brings to light the fact that most people are not creating these so-called “frivolous lawsuits” because they want to win a large cash reward, but because they want to hold the wrong doer’s accountable. Many who vote for the laws that allow caps on compensation seem not to take into account that companies do wrong to people occasionally.
Know the laws in your state, and what they entail. Read any contract you sign, and always question your social media. This film points out just a few of the flaws that can happen both in social media and in the legal system. If each person doesn’t take action for themselves, who will? With just an extra bit of pathos and just enough logos, this film would be suggested for anyone of or entering voting age who is looking to see what happens to their