2015-01-21
1122
1. The claimant bought sandwiches at a drive-through McDonald’s.
2. She didn’t have to have medical treatment for 2 years.
3. McDonald’s wanted to give her $800.
4. Liebeck and her lawyer tried a few more times to reach a settlement.
5. Liebeck filed a suit for active McDonald’s negligence.
6. The evidence didn’t show that McDonald’s did actually serve their coffee much too hot.
7. The court found McDonald’s knew their coffee was injuring people.
The claimant, a 79-year-old woman, bought coffee at a drive-through McDonald’s and got really bad third-degree burns when she opened the container. She had to have medical treatment for two years. Actually, at first she only tried to get $20,000 to pay her medical expenses. But McDonald's only wanted to give her $800. Then Liebeck and her lawyer tried a few more times to reach a settlement before the case went to trial, but McDonald's always refused. Probably because in other cases the courts had decided that coffee burns were an open and obvious danger, and McDonald's thought Liebeck couldn't win. Liebeck filed a suit for gross negligence, saying that McDonald's sold coffee that was 'defectively manufactured'.
The evidence showed that McDonald's did actually serve their coffee much too hot. In fact, more than 700 people had been burnt in the years from 1982 to 1992 by McDonald's coffee. The court found they knew their coffee was injuring people.
The jury found for the claimant. They said that McDonald's was 80% responsible and Liebeck was 20% responsible. They said the warning on the coffee cup was too small and not sufficient.
At first Liebeck was awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages, which was then reduced by 20% to $160,000. They also awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages. The idea was that McDonald's should pay her two days' worth of coffee revenues, which were about $1.35 million per day.
The judge then reduced the punitive damages to $480,000. So the total amount of damages was $640,000.
The decision was later appealed by McDonald's and Liebeck, but they settled out of court for an amount less than $600,000. Nobody actually knows how much she got, as a matter of fact.
Просмотрите образцы иска в гражданский суд США и образец иска в Арбитражный суд РФ. Изучите и сравните форму и структуру. Определите, в чем состоит сходство и различие по форме и содержанию иска в гражданский суд США и иска в Арбитражный суд РФ.
Образец 1.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CITY, MARYLAND
| SANDY JENKINS - Plaintiff v CONNECTIVE ENERGY- Defendant | * * * * * | CASE NO.: |
