Product Liability Claim
We often take it for granted when we buy a product including toys, cars, food and medicines that they are subject to high regulatory standards intended to keep us safe.
Unfortunately this is sometimes not the case and at some stage in a products manufacture and packaging, errors in this process can occur. These errors can result in illness, injury or worse case, death.
If this was to happen from breaches of responsibility, and we can prove that the product is defective, you may have a strong product liability claim that we can help you with
A well know product liability case is that of Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants. also known as the "McDonald's coffee case," is a well-known 1994 product liability lawsuit that became a flashpoint in the debate in the U.S. over tort reform after a jury awarded $2.86 million to a woman who burned herself with hot coffee. The trial judge reduced the total award to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided. The case entered popular understanding as an example of frivolous litigation; ABC News called the case "the poster child of excessive lawsuits.
Others, especially opponents of tort reform, argue that Liebeck's recovery was just. They argue that the popular understanding of the case omits significant and relevant information. Liebeck's attorneys argued that McDonald's coffee was "defective", claiming that it was hotter and more likely to cause serious injury than coffee served elsewhere. Moreover, McDonalds had refused several prior opportunities to settle for less than the $640,000 ultimately awarded. Reformers defend the popular understanding of the case as materially accurate; note that the vast majority of judges to consider similar cases dismiss them before they get to a jury; and argue that McDonald's refusal to offer more than a nuisance settlement reflects the meritless nature of the suit rather than any wrongdoing.