Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Mcdonald case analysis
Mcdonald case analysis
Mcdonald case analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Mcdonald case analysis
Stella Liebeck’s Case
Dana Hoyle
University of the People
On February 27, 1992 Stella Liebeck of New Mexico went to purchase coffee from Mc. Donald in her grandson’s car. Liebeck’s grandson then parked the car to give her an opportunity to put her cream into her coffee. The car transporting her at the time, had no cup holder so she improvised and placed the cup between her legs. During that process Liebeck spilled all of her coffee and was rushed to the hospital, because the coffee burn through the pants that she was wearing. Upon arriving at the hospital she was informed by the doctors that she suffered third degree on six percent of her skin. Liebeck suffered tremendously as a result of the burn. She was hospitalized for eight days and had to undergo surgery. Apart from that she was somewhat disabled for two years. Liebeck made attempts to settle with McDonald, she wanted them to be accountable for the injury she suffered. She wanted them to pay for the incurred expenses as well as the expense she anticipated in the future. McDonald on the other hand agreed to pay $800.00 but Liebeck was asking for $20.000. This case wasn’t settled using ADR methods so it became a trial (Wiki, n.d).
What was the basis of her claim against McDonald's?
Liebeck basis for her claim was that the served her coffee that was
…show more content…
It is considered to be a deliberate act on the defendant’s part to cause the harm that occurs. In my opinion the, this was not intentional. McDonald was not wilful in trying to harm Liebeck. Intentionally trying to hurt Liebeck would mean loss of revenue and reputation for McDonald and I firmly believe that is a risk they were not willing to take hence, why it is not intentional tort case. Also, to act with intent would mean to see someone coming and hurting them in the process. This was not the case for Liebeck, she bought the coffee and went back to the car and then the coffee
On May 30, 2018 at approximately 1714 hours, I transported Kelly Lynn Nichols to the Land O’ Lakes Detention Center due to her being under arrest for DWLSR (PRPD 201800000726). At the time of her arrest she was read Miranda from an agency issued card and verbally acknowledged she understood her rights. She was asked multiple times if she had anything on her person and she advised she did not. She was warned twice that introduction of contraband was a felony offence.
Tina Liebling is a major candidate for Minnesota governor. She is a Minnesotan native from a large family of 5, where she is the second oldest. She grew up in Minnesota tell she moved to Massachusetts with her father after her parents’ divorce. However, she quickly returned to Minnesota for college, where she attended the University of Minnesota. Due to her low financial support Tina took on 3 jobs. Although Tina graduated from Minnesota with a B.A in Spanish her educational career did not end there. She continued her education at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, where she gained a M. S in Public Heath and then she also earned a J.D at Boston University School of Law. She then moved to Chicago for a summer internship at
This case refers to a decision made by the Supreme Court of California, pertaining to injuries suffered by the plaintiff when a bottle of Coca-Cola exploded in her hand as she was moving it from the case to a refrigerator.
On the 1st of October in the year 2017, the defendant, in this case, the supermarket was found liable for the case Susan injury in the supermarket's premises. The hip injury on Susan’s hip which was a result of the slipping over a squashed banana. The presence of the squashed banana in the premises was an outright sign of negligence and recklessness by the supermarket's staff. (Damage law)
The patient for this analysis is Ms. Julia Kolpek. Julia is a 36- year-old female. She doesn’t drink, smoke or take any medication. However, due to her work environment she doesn’t have time to exercise either. She enjoys drinking soda and eating chips throughout the day. Julia’s caries risk assessment was measured at high. Her initial plaque score was a 77%. Based on the seven series vertical bitewings, it showed that she has multiple carious lesions. Julia’s daily activities make her a good candidate for this dietary analysis.
With the retirement of Ron Jewett, Ph.D., Desiree Libengood, M.A., A.B.D., has been named the next dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. Libengood was selected via a vigorous internal search process that engaged faculty, staff, and students. “We had three stellar candidates,” noted Provost Don Tucker, Ed.D., and the decision was a difficult one. We are pleased that Desiree Libengood has accepted the invitation to serve in this capacity.”
Intentional tort is one half of the tort law that protects people from “restraint, unauthorized touching, and any other contact that is not authorized” (112, Cheeseman). One example of intentional tort is battery, which is “ Unauthorized and harmful or offensive physical contact with a person who causes you injury, indirect physical contact is also battery as long as the end result is injury” (113, Cheeseman). This is just one example and there are many more such as assault, false imprisonment, shoplifting, invasion of the right to privacy, and many more. The difference between an intentional tort and an
Nicole stepped on Caroline mistakenly, which was an unlawful touching. According to Elliott and Quinn there are three elements to this intentional tort; force, direct application and intent which is so in this case. However, according to Croom-Johnson LJ in the case of Wilson v Pringle “the first distinction between two causes of action where there is personal injury is the element of contact between the claimant and the defendant; that is touching of sort. In the action of negligence, the physical contact (where it takes place at all) is normally through by no means always unintended” . In the action of trespass to constitute battery, it is deliberate. Even so, it is not very intended contact, which is tortious. Apart from in acting in self-defence), there are many examples in everyday life where an i...
Two days after her seventeenth birthday, Laura Welch had a friend in her car and the wind in her hair. The world was young in 1963 - from Laura's music, school, and friends, up to the young couple in the White House, John and Jackie Kennedy. Whatever problems Laura had were minor ones, and this day was meant for driving, listening to the radio, and chatting with her girlfriend.
This case was about a father by the name of Bob Latimer, this man had a daughter who was suffering with a disease called cerebral palsy. The disease was unfortunately entrenched with his daughter since her birth and was caused by brain damage. The disease made her immobile with the exception of the rare movements she showed through facial expressions or head movements. Twelve year old Tracey Latimer was in continuous pain every moment of her life and she was incapable of taking care of herself despite her age. She was bedridden and could not communicate with anyone in her family; she was more like a living corpse. Hoping only to better her condition, her family took her through several surgeries where some were successful but did not really benefit her in any way. Tracey had five to six seizures everyday and her condition would only get worse. All this was unbearable to her father Mr. Latimer like it would be to any loving father and it was then that he decided to end her pain and suffering. Latimer put Tracey into the cab of his truck and suffocated her. He did this by attaching a pipeline into the exhaust of the cab and this allowed carbon monoxide to enter the car which eventually leads to the painless death of his daughter. He was first convicted in 1994 of second degree murder with a life sentence term of 25 years and without parole for 10 years. Latimer then appealed his case to the Supreme Court and the previous decision was upheld. However, there was an error found in the procedure of the trial as some of the jury members were questioned on their beliefs in relation to the crime on the basis of religion, mercy killings, and etc. which then constituted the trial as unfair und...
Rosa Lee Cunningham is a 52-year old African American female. She is 5-foot-1-inch, 145 pounds. Rosa Lee is married however, is living separately from her husband. She has eight adult children, Bobby, Richard, Ronnie, Donna (Patty), Alvin, Eric, Donald (Ducky) and one child who name she did not disclose. She bore her eldest child at age fourteen and six different men fathered her children. At Rosa Lee’s recent hospital admission to Howard University Hospital emergency room blood test revealed she is still using heroin. Though Rosa Lee recently enrolled in a drug-treatment program it does not appear that she has any intention on ending her drug usage. When asked why she no longer uses heroin she stated she doesn’t always have the resources to support her addiction. Rosa Lee is unemployed and receiving very little in government assistance. She appears to
We learned from Lau and Johnson (2014) text “strict liability torts require neither intent nor carelessness (p. 152).” Upon viewing Susan Saladoff’s movie documentary the Hot Coffee Movie Trailer link, I was intrigued to learn more about the case. I, too, was an individual who did not have all of the facts about the case. Let’s explore four questions for this week’s discussion which is all about the tort reform.
Rosa Lee has exhibited signs and symptoms of substance abuse. She has become very skilled in the art of manipulation, a behavior that can often be associated with drug abuse. Her priorities are questionable, at best, regarding finances and her children’s own substance abuse issues. For example:
The defendant is foresees these consequences, although not desired, will occur as a result of their intended act. Oblique intention can be seen in the case Hyam v DPP (1975). This case resulted in the accused being convicted on two counts of murder. The defendant was a jealous woman who had been romantically involved with a man, Mr Jones who had then gone on to have a relationship with another woman, Ms Booth who he later became engaged to in the spring of 1971. The defendant as a result went to Ms Booth’s home and poured petrol through her letterbox, she then put newspaper, which she set on fire through also. This quickly ignited and the defendant went straight home without alerting anyone to the blaze, which was spreading. Although Ms Booth and her son were able to escape through a window her two daughters perished, as they were asphyiciated by the fumes from the flames, which were engulfing their house as they slept. The defendant argued that she was not guilty of murder as she did not intend on causing harm or killing anyone, she had just wanted to frighten Ms Booth and as a result should only be found guilty of manslaughter. However as she would have been aware of a high probability of serious injury or death and therefore was found guilty of oblique intention. In this case causing harm was not intended but resulted
7. The categories of intentional torts are acts of assault, battery, false imprisonment, defamation of character, fraud, invasion of privacy and infliction of emotional