A Florida jury awarded $800,000 in damages to a 7-year-old girl Wednesday for her suffering and emotional distress when a Chicken McNugget landed on her leg, causing second-degree burns.
The injury occurred in 2019 while visiting a McDonald’s at the age of four, and the case drew analogies to a famously successful lawsuit filed against the fast-food business more than 30 years ago by a woman who scalded herself on hot coffee.
According to court documents, a Broward County jury awarded the girl, Olivia Caraballo, damages for pain, suffering and other mental anguish: $400,000 for the pain she endured and an additional $400,000 for any future suffering caused by the injuries.
The family’s lawyers had asked for $15 million. Olivia’s parents, Philana Holmes and Humberto Caraballo Estevez, filed the lawsuit in state court against McDonald’s and Upchurch Foods, the operator of the franchise in Tamarac, Florida.
McDonald’s faces legal consequences: 80,000 awarded to girl burned by Chicken Mcnuggets
Credit: The New York Times
In May, a second jury found the two corporations guilty for failing to provide adequate instructions or warnings, for example, on packaging, regarding the risks of injury from a Chicken McNuggets meal containing white meat chicken pieces.
As of Thursday, it was not clear whether McDonald’s and Upchurch Foods would appeal the ruling. McDonald’s lawyers declined to comment. Upchurch Foods’ lawyers should have responded more quickly to several calls for comment. They have 15 days under Florida law to seek a new trial or 30 days to appeal.
Jordan Redavid, the family’s lead attorney, stated that the jury’s conclusion amounted to “total justice” for Olivia.
“For years, the defendants claimed that we did not have a case and that they did not bear any responsibility,” Redavid said. He claimed that the damages awarded were much greater than the $156,000 McDonald’s lawyers had offered the jury in their closing arguments.
Credit: Inventive
Holmes purchased a six-piece Chicken McNuggets Happy Meal for Olivia through a McDonald’s drive-thru in Tamarac, Florida, in August 2019. One of the nuggets fell into Olivia’s lap after she passed it to her son in the backseat, leaving her thigh “disfigured and scarred,” according to the initial claim. Holmes said in a telephone interview Thursday that she was “satisfied with the decision” and that she was glad the jury considered her daughter’s grief.
“I just wanted Olivia’s voice to be heard,” Mrs. Holmes said. Mr Redavid said the court will oversee the distribution of the funds awarded to the child, perhaps through a court-appointed guardian who will propose how the money should be disbursed. Furthermore, he stated that the cash will most likely be invested until Olivia reaches the age of majority.
The case was compared to a well-known lawsuit against McDonald’s, which also involved a woman who was scalded by the fast-food restaurant’s coffee. Stella Liebeck, then 79, suffered severe burns after spilling her morning coffee on her lap at a drive-thru McDonald’s in Albuquerque in 1992.
Liebeck’s action resulted in a staggering $2.9 million in damages. According to Professor Ryan Calo, professor of tort law at the University of Washington School of Law, the McDonald’s case became synonymous with excessive litigation.
Credit: 6ABC
Professor Calo asserted that the hot coffee lawsuit was analogous to a conventional tort case and had more merit than public debate had allowed, since court hearings showed that the corporation served its coffee at temperatures ranging from 180 to 190 degrees. He claimed that despite the jury finding him partially guilty, the plaintiff was able to influence the practices of a sprawling corporate giant. He added that a judge later reduced Ms. Liebeck’s award to approximately $640,000, which he found to be a more proportionate amount.
Redavid admitted that the two McDonald’s cases seemed similar at first glance: a burned customer, a boiling hot item and a huge McDonald’s settlement. However, the circumstances were different, she explained. Ms. Liebeck’s detractors claimed that she should have recognized a hot cup of coffee. But it was hard to blame 4-year-old Olivia for not anticipating how hot a Chicken McNugget could be.
Credit: The Colombian
“This is not the infamous hot coffee case; this is the Olivia case,” Redavid and his attorney said in a post-verdict statement.
Since the 1992 case, McDonald’s and many other coffee shops have resorted to using larger labels with more direct warnings on their products. Currently, McDonald’s does not include warning labels for its Chicken McNuggets.
Holmes is hopeful. “Hopefully, McDonald’s will change their Happy Meal boxes now,” he said, “to add a label or a warning that the food inside is coming straight from the fryer.”
what do you think about it? Let us know in the comments.
For more trending stories, follow us on Telegram.
Categories: Trending
Source: vtt.edu.vn