Hot Coffee, Cold Cash and the Tort-Reform Con

[marmar]

By Margaret Carlson Jul 13, 2011 12:02 AM ET


(Bloomberg) The story of Stella Liebeck came to stand for all that is moronic about our legal system and culture. Liebeck sued McDonald’s in 1994 after spilling a 49- cent cup of coffee in her lap as she was wheeling away from a drive-thru window in Albuquerque, New Mexico. She hit the liability jackpot, winning a $2.86 million jury award as compensation for this minor nuisance.

.....(snip).....

This story might be amusing, or outrageous, if true. It’s not. In fact, Liebeck wasn’t driving, her grandson was, and they were parked when the accident occurred. The coffee wasn’t just hot, it was scalding at more than 180 degrees; anything more than 140 degrees is a burn hazard. Liebeck was hospitalized for eight days in critical condition with third-degree burns. She endured skin grafts over 6 percent of her body, including sensitive areas. Rather than rush to court, Liebeck asked McDonald’s to provide $20,000 toward her substantial medical expenses. McDonald’s offered $800. And Liebeck didn’t receive $2.86 million. A trial judge reduced the award to $640,000. Liebeck eventually settled for an even lower, undisclosed sum.

.....(snip).....

Those who supported tort reform to keep pesky plaintiffs like the Gourleys at bay should note that the financial impact may be precisely the opposite of what reformers intended. In the Gourleys’ case, the hospital and doctor don’t have to pay for Colin’s continuing care, and neither do their insurance companies. Who does? The rest of us. Facing an unmanageable financial burden, the Gourleys were forced to turn to Medicaid.

It is no cheaper to see a doctor in Texas, with its stringent liability caps, than in Illinois, which has no caps at all. In fact, according to the Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care, Texas is among the nation’s biggest spenders on health care while achieving some of the lowest-quality care. ..................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-13/hot-coffee-cold-cash-and-the-tort-reform-con-margaret-carlson.html

[somone]

1. "It is no cheaper to see a doctor in Texas, with its stringent liability caps"

Makes ya wonder where the savings went

[spinbaby]

6. Looting

It's always looting. The looters and the plunder may vary, but it's always looting.

[gratuitous]

2. Wanna understand "tort reform"?

Picture yourself standing at the courthouse door. It's closed in your face, locked from the inside, and wealthy tortfeasors are on the other side, laughing their butts off at you. That's tort reform.

[ejpoeta]

3. and the thing is... the purpose of punitive damages is to make the doctor or company stop doing it.

they aren't going to stop doing it unless they have a financial incentive. it was obvious in the mcdonald's case... they had hundreds of cases of people who had been burned by their 190 degree coffee before her case and that hadn't stopped them. and the case of that family with the twins... that doctor had had how many malpractice suits?? there is a reason for people to be able to sue... the only thing these folks seem to understand.... it might cost me MONEY! it's sad that is the case but it is.

[hifiguy]

4. Tort reform is the biggest red herring this side

of terrorism. I've worked in the judicial system and as an attorney for some years. Meritless claims are regularly dismissed by judges at early stages of the proceedings. The chances of getting a jackpot verdict, and having it upheld by a trial court and an appeals court, are about the same as getting the $100 million lottery ticket. When huge verdicts are upheld, there are damned good reasons for it.

The call for "tort reform" is bullshit on stilts and steroids.

[drm604]

5. K&R

I get so sick of people spouting the Stella Liebeck lies. If we have a tort crisis in this country, then where are the other examples? Why is this the only example that gets used, and even then distorted way beyond the truth?

It there was such a crisis there'd be many many examples that could be stated truthfully. The fact that it's always this same lie that gets trotted out shows that they have nothing to back up their claims. Some insurance industry group decided that this story sold well, especially if they lied about it.