6 Famous 'Frivolous Lawsuit' Stories That Are Total B.S.
Every so often, there's a big news story about how America is drowning in an epidemic of frivolous lawsuits, and instead of going on with boring statistics and facts -- which nobody wants to read -- they tell sensational stories about burglars suing their victims or kids suing schools because they hurt their feelings.
The problem is that most of these stories are anywhere from half-bullshit to complete bullshit. But we want to believe them, because it feels good to believe that tons of people out there are stupider and greedier than we are, and those people are what's wrong with this country today. Not us. We like outrageous villains that don't hit anywhere close to home.
People like Stella Liebeck.
#6.
The Infamous "McDonald's Hot Coffee" Lawsuit
Probably the most famous "frivolous lawsuit" example of all time. No doubt you've heard of the lady that sued McDonald's because she spilled some hot coffee in her lap while driving. What a moron! you might have thought. How stupid do you have to be to not know coffee is hot? Americans these days! Blaming everyone but themselves for their mistakes!
Via autotribute.com
"This is all your fault, coffee!"
It turns out there's a lot more to the story. First of all, the hot coffee wasn't just uncomfortable and embarrassing, it gave her third degree burns over six percent of her body, which required fucking skin grafts. You can see the burns yourself if you're not squeamish.
Secondly, coffee served at that temperature (180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit) will give a person third-degree burns in two to seven seconds, while home-coffee brewers normally serve coffee at much lower temperatures (130 two 140 degrees) which won't immediately burn you. Yes, Starbucks and other joints do serve coffee at the hotter temperatures -- because some customers prefer it -- but then again, they get sued for it also. Thirdly, she attempted to settle for $20,000 at one point, and McDonald's refused, which is when she started getting cranky.
Getty
"Not my problem."
You may have heard that she got millions of dollars, when the final award was $640,000. Then from that you take out the medical bills (hint: skin grafts aren't cheap).
But she has to take some responsibility, right? She may not have been driving, but she was trying to open the lid in her lap so she could add cream and sugar. That's kind of careless, isn't it? Why couldn't the jury see that?
Well, they did. That's why the compensatory damages portion ($200,000) was reduced by 20 percent, because they ruled it was 20 percent her fault.
Getty
Imagine if paternity tests could be ruled that way.
Even the Stella Awards website -- a site dedicated to rooting out silly lawsuits and named after Stella Liebeck herself as the symbol of what's wrong with our justice system -- admits all these facts are true.
So if you still want to argue about it, you have to admit this case isn't the joke most people play it off as in email forwards and know-it-all water cooler lectures.
#5.
Mother Sues School Board Because Her Daughter Got Caught Giving Oral Sex!
Newsweek had a pretty shocking story about this in 2004: "In Kentucky, a mother sued her daughter's school after the girl had performed oral sex on a boy during a schoolbus ride returning from a marching-band contest. The woman blamed poor adult supervision, saying her daughter had been forced."
What a stupid, sue-happy lady, right? Blaming the school because she raised her daughter to be a tramp.
Via Wikimedia Commons
Woman's daughter, according to the news.
Actually, what really happened was that the school board first suspended the girl for 10 days, for clearly being such a tramp. Then, an investigation turned up the fact she was actually the victim of sexual assault -- she actually was forced.
Oops. The school got right on it -- by suspending her again; this time for not reporting the assault. So she was forced into performing oral sex, and then, as the icing on the cake, suspended twice for it. Justice!
Getty
"You kind of look like whores too. Suspensions all around!"
You can understand why a mother might want to take that to court, just to stick it to the people responsible, but part of her lawsuit also involved a demand that the school board set up employee training on how to deal with sexual assaults. Kind of a far cry from the picture of a greedy entitled American who doesn't want to take responsibility for her slutty daughter, isn't it?
#4.
All of the "Stella Awards" Cases in Email Forwards
Have you ever read about the case where a man sued a driver for running him over as he was trying to steal the driver's hubcaps? Or the woman who sued a nightclub because she fell while she was trying to sneak in the back window?
Lesson: Never pay bottom dollar for a fake ID.
Never happened.
There was a really popular set of six or seven of those going around in email forwards a while ago, sometimes purporting to be from the Stella Awards, which distances itself completely from those emails. Yet, if you've been at a party and had some guy go off on a rant about our crazy lawsuit-happy society, more often than not he was going by one of those emails. The vast majority of the "World's Gone Crazy!" lawsuit stories come from that pool of urban legend.
So, what if there's stupid email forwards going around, though. Nobody seriously pays attention to that shit, it just goes into the spam bin with the "Neiman Marcus cookie recipe" and the "tampons contain asbestos" crap. Right?
Also the ones about Procter & Gamble sponsoring Satanism.
Well, some people took it really seriously. Some newspapers even. The New York Daily News printed that email forward verbatim in 2002, and the owner of national news magazine U.S. News & World Report, Mort Zuckerman, cited examples from that same email about fictional lawsuits a year later to show us what's wrong with America today. When told it was fake, he published a sort-of correction that basically said, "Well, maybe these were fake but we all know this happens all the time, so what's the difference."
Getty
This is known as "implant" logic.
And that's exactly the thought process of everybody who endlessly repeats these stories. It's why the guy in the cubicle next to you is happy to tell you about the burglar who broke into a house, tripped over the coffee table and then sued the owners of the home into bankruptcy. Sure, he doesn't know exactly where that happened or where he read about it, but we all know that stuff happens, so what does it matter if that story is true? After all, this is a country where you can sue for millions if your coffee was too hot.
I looked at the picture of Stella's burns. Yeah, coffee's not supposed to do that to a human body. McDonald's was definitely in the wrong.
Reply1-5 Sound reasonable enough, but 6 still smells like BS to me. The reason for this is that when you make coffee at home, you f*****g boil the water, the water at this point is 100 degrees celsius (over 200 farenheit). It loses some tempurature in the following steps, but it's still f*****g hot. Coffee brewers brew at around 93 Degrees celsius, still f*****g hot. To me, it seems that people making and brweing coffee at these tempuratures have no right to support this article's end of the argument, because who are you going to sue when you spill the coffee yourself?
ReplyThat argument not convincing enough for you? Don't worry, I have another one.
Research in britain has shown the even coffee at only 65 degrees (149 Farenheit) will still cause deep tissue damage. It has also been researched that coffee needs to be around 90 degrees to release all the taste and whatnot. Basically: Coffee's supposed to be f*****g hot, and it was a damn shame what happened to poor old Stella, but it was still her own fault.
No...no, it wasn't. At least not 100% her fault. I agree that she shouldn't have been trying to open it while driving, and so did the jury. But when a fast food place gives you coffee that's hot enough to give you third degree burns, they have to take some of the responsibility.
Forget those "real world" classes everybody wants taught in high school (balancing a checkbook, filling out a 1040, etc.). What the world really needs is a course in how to separate reality from BS on the internet, and this article would be the perfect introductory text.
ReplyRe Stella case: Also heard that particular McDonald's franchise was warned a couple of times before the incident that its coffee was being served WAY too hot. Can anyone confirm/deny, please?
ReplyFantastic article Chirstina!
ReplyThank you for explaining all that, I learnt quite a bit :)
Spare me. Is this article intended to deflect the other 5 billion REAL frivolous lawsuits that happen every year? I work in a hospital and a patient was all medically ready to be discharged. But she lived at an assisted living facility that REFUSED to accept her until Monday even though she was perfectly stable for discharge. The supervisor apparently claimed they "didn't have the nursing staff on the weekends" (this was a Saturday). They said it would have been a legal liability if they let her return to the facility on Saturday.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesSo this woman SITS in the hospital racking up HUGE costs and risks a hospital acquired infection all because scumbag lawyers have produced this climate of fear through other similar suits.
These stories may not be BS but there are plenty like them that aren't.
Fine, cite a few frivolous suits and we can discuss. And I mean genuine loophole abuse, not just a case where somebody does something you don't like and a narrative gets built around it. In your assisted living situation, what would you have the home do, leave her unattended all weekend? The fact that she developed an infection by Monday suggests that she was still very vulnerable.
Mort Zuckerman? Is that you?
Medical malpractice law is a big load of Something Else Entirely, to put it politely.
I would be happy to read an article about stupid malpractice suits, or better yet the stupid "cover your arse at all costs" logic that leads to patients and doctors alike getting royally screwed.
Now go ahead and write that article! This one is on a completely different subject matter.
It's like if you turned up in the comment section for, I dunno, "most insane Japanese robots" and explained that China makes some perfectly ordinary alarm clocks.
Actually in Ireland, people breaking into your house and getting hurt and suing you is actually an issue. There was a big case where 2 men broke into an old guy's house, I think to rob the place, but the guy was home and he got a gun out. The 2 intruders basically told him they would come back and kill him, and when they ran away, the old guy shot one of them. He got charged with manslaughter because it didn't count as self-defence because the intruder was shot in the back. (I didn't explain that very well, anyone else from Ireland care to re-tell that correctly? :p)
Reply Hide All See All 3 Repliesit is basically human rights it is the ptincipal of if anything happens on your property it is your fault and is a safety hazard which you could be sued about at least that is how i see it and i think that shouldnt be allowed
That's not even close to the same thing. You shoot someone in the back virtually anywhere, under virtually any circumstances, and you'll face a charge. Societies have generally found that having people just blaze away whenever they feel like it isn't conducive to a peaceful and productive environment.
If you have to defend yourself, you can use force. If you don't, you're supposed to call the cops, whose job it is to use force. This is pretty basic stuff.
First off, what you're describing is completely different. That's the state pursuing criminal charges against the homeowner, not the burglars filing a civil suit.
Second, it sounds completely justified. You can't shoot someone in the back as they leave because they verbally threatened you; that's not self-defense. The guy absolutely should have been charged for that.
I recently find a perfect online cl ub for da ting and making new friend ,that is COUGARKISS,C0M, my freinds told me about it ,and now I'm a menmber of the club,you can find me on it（my id is hila1971）. I think it is more effcient than these cha tting bars, you guys should try it , and the most wonderful thing is it is signup free.
ReplySorry, but 6,3 and 1 support the case for tort reform. I know all about Stella, but why didn't her idiot driver get sued for failing to help her avoid getting burned? Why didn't she just yank the sweatpants off? You avoid potholes by watching where you step. And you shouldn't be able to sue someone with money just because the person who's really at fault doesn't have deep pockets.
Reply Hide All See All 6 RepliesUh, bro? 6: It was, yanno, hot enough to burn basically instantaneously.Why don't you stick your hand in boiling water and try to pull out really fast? Or better yet, try to get out of sweat pants while buckled in a car in under 2 seconds. Can ya?
3:In the grass, where you're supposed to be, hidden, and you drop your insurance? Yeah, no.
1:It was, yanno, already hit, and it jammed. Or, in other words, the product was defective and caused the injuries.
So, no, they don't. They support the exact opposite.
Put on a pair of sweatpants. Now get them all wet. Sit in a car with the door closed. Now, attempt to "yank the sweatpants off" in less than the 2 seconds it takes for third degree burns to occur. Also, do this while being an 80 yr old woman. You will quickly understand how f*****g stupid what you just said was.
It's not easy to remove pants that you're wearing while you're sitting down in a cramped place and can't change positions or move around much. You basically have to be able to lift your ass up off the seat while still having your hands free to tug at the waist of the pants. Most 80 yr old women cannot do this, period, no matter how much time is allotted. Forget doing it in 2 seconds. I'm not sure a 12 yr old gymnast could do it in 2 seconds.
Never mind the driver. Here in the UK we drink tea, and folks complain if it isn't served at pretty-near boiling point. We manage to deal with it without getting scalded -- are Americans really so clumsy that they can't be trusted with hot liquids?
actually, we went over the McDonald's case in my business law class. The mother of this woman was also part of the suit, and part of the reason that they received burns to the extent they did was not only that the coffee was so hot, but the fact that one of them (I can't remember which one) was wearing spandex pants three sizes too small that had to be cut off at the hospital when they arrived. I guess "tiny pants" fell under the 20% that they were responsible
the third degree burn scars on my arm and side can attest to the fact that even when not belted into a car if you spill searing hot liguid onto your shirt/pants it's not so easy to get them off before serious damage can be done.
The problem is, that hot liquid keeps burning, even if you can strip off in less than 2 seconds.
I tested this concept last weekend.
i get SO tired of hearing the McDonald's coffee lawsuit brought up every time any lawsuit hits the news....
ReplyThese distortions over lawsuits led many people to believe that things like TORT Reform were necessary in order to not pervert the justice system. What actually happened, was that many people were stripped of their 5th, 6th, and 7th amendment rights. Have you ever signed an arbitration clause when you got a job? You cannot bring your employer to court should you be wronged in any way. Thank you, Karl Rove and the media.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesBull. The problem is cockroach lawyers like John Edwards who sued ob/gyns to death claiming that children would not have developed cerebral palsy if the doctor had done a c section. Now that c sections have gone through the roof do you know how much cerebral palsy rates have dropped? That's right. They haven't dropped ONE BIT. I hope that SOB goes to jail for a VERY long time
thank you for providing an example but TORT Reform itself is a much bigger problem. Are there frivolous lawsuits? Yes, but they shouldn't be eliminated by denying Constitutional rights with arbitration clauses and laws.
@LordElrond - your logic is faulty. Just because the rates haven't dropped (I'd like to see a source on that, BTW) doesn't mean the lawsuits were frivolous. First, courts can't be expected to be perfect - they have to rule using the information available at the time. Second, even if rates of CP haven't dropped with increasing C-sections, that doesn't mean there isn't a connection. There are other causes. If I ban diving in my pool to reduce injuries, but at the same time pool users start playing more water polo, my injury rates might stay the same, but that's only because the increase from water polo is offsetting the reduction from the diving ban. If the ban weren't in place, I'd have an INCREASE in injuries, instead of just maintaining rates.
I think you're letting your personal political prejudices muddy your judgement. Try coming at the issue objectively, rather than looking to cherry-pick evidence to support your pre-conceived notion.
Since when are you required to report a sexual assault to the school system? A lot of victims of sexual assault are reluctant to report it at all. Even to police. Who, by the way, don't lock up the victim in jail for 30 days when they find out about one.
ReplyThe school should be utterly ashamed of themselves. The principal or whoever was responsible for the decision should re-think working around kids.
I had heard only of the coffee lawsuit previously, but I also knew about the severe injuries and the fact that McDonald's had been sued multiple times before for the same thing. (I seem to remember a similar "frivolous" lawsuit against Disney around the same time which turned out to be the same sort of ongoing problem that people had been paid off to hide over and over.)
I think there's a case to be made for requiring people to report that kind of crime, but that doesn't mean they deserve to be punished if they don't. And at the very least, the same rule should have been reported against all the other witnesses.
Awesome article, as usual (but not always). This is where I spend most of my reading time these days. Keep up the good work!
Replyhaha I recognize that image! -isn't that a College Humor oil spill sketch still?
Reply1 and 5 are so horrifying!
ReplyDidn't know about the actual amount of the settlement but as to the temperature of the coffee . . . My mother used to make coffee before Sunday breakfast before she ever bought a coffee maker. She used a kettle. When it whistled, the water was ready to pour into the filter above the coffee pot. The kettle whistled because the water was boiling and rapidly turning to steam which was forced through the small hole causing the whistling noise. Water boils at 212 degrees. I'm pretty sure that this lady has had plenty of experience with this method of brewing coffee (it was just over 20 years ago that my mother bought her first coffee maker and Stella is/was much older than my mother so I'm guessing she has had a LOT of experience with the boiling water method). While it IS a shame that she was burned and I truly hate to see anyone in pain like that (was it 3rd degree burns? I had heard that it was 2nd. Either way, it's still nasty), you have to admit that it's a bit risky to open the cup while it's in your lap (was she driving at the time?). Granted I take bigger risks every day at the auto-body shop where I work.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesShe was not driving at the time. She was in the front passenger seat and the car was completely parked and turned off.
Actually, the story presented here is not accurate either. The truth is much worse than what was written here. Mc Donalds corporate offices had received over 700 complaints about burns caused by the coffee. When tested, the cups with tops would mainting the coffee tempreture at a level that would cause sevear burns in seconds for over 20 minutes. They basically planned on you buying coffee, not drinking any until you finished your drive to work (or put milk or cream into the coffee to lower the overall temp). The original award was for 80% of actual damages, and millions in Punitive damages. Punitive damages are there to punish people and companies who are negligent. Why Punish them? To prevent them from taking 700 complains of injury, and not changing the policy that caused the injury. The punishment was 2 days of coffee sales for Mc Donalds. Lets see, scald hundreds of people with coffee served in a way where you could use it as a weapon for 20 minutes and your punishment is 2 days of coffee sales. Seems pretty leinant to me. Add to that, the award was reduced by 90% in negotiations... McDonalds changed their policy and coffee was served at a more reasonable 150 degrees (unsafe for 1 to 2 minutes). Now, individual stores may break the rule, but to do so opens them up to law suits... Again, the system WORKED in this case.
I somehow doubt your mother poured the boiling water into a coffee filter that she was holding in her teeth. More likely, she made the coffee and then allowed it to cool before drinking, which is what McDonald's should have done.
what about the drunk driver who killed two people who is now suing the family of those he killed because he was hospitalized after the accident?
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesAnyone can sue anyone for anything. The question is, did the drunk driver win?
^ True. I remember hearing a guy tell a talk show host that he had been sued by a robber who broke into his home because his dog bit the robber. The robber didn't win his case, though.
What about it? Anyone can bring suit - that's kinda the point of the system. If you feel you've been screwed over, you have the right to bring that before an impartial 3rd party. The judge, meanwhile, has every right to laugh you out of court, and slap you with costs and fines for wasting the court's time. That's not the system being broken, that's the system acting precisely as it was designed to do.
Phone booths, huh? How quaint. Not many of those left.
ReplyI've read this before, but today I took some time to read through the comments, and I must say, either those people who are crying "it's the victim's fault!" are either 10-year-olds, illiterate, or just plain heartless.
ReplyLook, there might be a chance, given only what we see here in this article, that it was mostly the victim's fault in some of these (the coffee, the pot hole, etc). It might be. I'll give you that. (I personally do not believe so).
But Jesus Christ, you all still sound like assholes.
yeah, because we all know that if a civilian and a company/government quarrel it's ALWAYS the big bad business that's at fault and suggesting otherwise makes you some soulless corporate drone trying to screw over the little man
Jesus people, clytamnestra wasn't saying ALL company/government quarrels are ALWAYS the civilian's fault. Calm the f**k down. SOMETIMES a person tries to commit fraud against the company/government. He's also not saying these stories fit under that umbrella. But thanks for proving his point anyway. Idiots.
I like the Dr.Who reference.
Reply