Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants

I think the hot drink purchase from restaurant could quickly give me third degree of burns and I would agree with the case of Liebeck case.Meawhile here are the brief history of liebeck and how the incidence happen to her that cause her bodily injury and how her manages to took her to court for damages. Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants Full case name Stella Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, P.T.S., Inc. and McDonald's International, Inc. Decided August 18, 1994 Citation(s) 1994 Extra LEXIS 23…

purchasing a product, the consumer should also take responsibility in their actions when it comes to using the product. This is commonly seen in the forms of misuse, alteration, or modification, but can also be caused by negligence. In the case of Saeter v. Harley Davidson Motor Co. (1960), the plaintiff, Arne Saeter, is suing the defendant, Harley Davidson Motor Co., for alleged negligence and faulty design of a motorcycle. Arne Saeter was driving from Washington through Oregon to California, a…

understand why the women sued McDonalds. When looking at the case, Mrs. Liebeck had a large amount of third degreen burns on her body that left here in the hospital racking up medical bills over 10 thousand dollars. This was the first shocker to me, I have spilt hot things on myself before even coffee and never have I ended up with even a burn that needed any type of medical treatment. The second issue that hit me was that Mrs. Liebeck tried to write McDonals telling them what happened and…

in this new endeavor was the food industry. The first nationally recognized food chain that served a vast majority of Americans with their products was Mcdonald’s. Soon after the Mcdonald’s chain started to gain popularity across America, a new platform for advertisements that would appeal to the masses emerged. The specific rhetoric of Mcdonald’s advertisements will be examined later on, but what is important to remember is that food corporations were given an opportunity to…

defectively marketed, so it is considered unfit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used; therefore, it is in violation of an implied warranty of merchantability. In contrast to this case of an implied warranty of merchantability case, Andrews v. Dial Corp., 2015 WL 6550055 (2015), “when a plaintiff brings a product liability suit under an implied warranty of merchantability, they are required to prove proximate causation.” In this case the plaintiff…

the whole reason they lobbied for this policy to pass back in 2005. Jacob S. Sonner touches on this subject in his article, Crack in the Floodgates: New York's Fourth Department, the PLCAA, and the Future of Gun Litigation after Williams v. Beemiller. The Williams v. Beemiller case centered around a 16-year-old basketball star, Daniel Williams, who was shot and severely wounded in 2003 by a firearm that was purchased through negligent firearm dealing. Sonner writes on the important firearm case,…