Frivolous Lawsuits

Frivolous Lawsuits:

Liebeck v. McDonald’s

And

Pearson v. Chung

AMBA 610

Professor Murray Blank

November 21, 2010

Executive Summary

Liebeck v. McDonald’s and Pearson v. Chung are used as two of the most notable examples of what society has called “frivolous lawsuits.” The following is a look at the facts of the each case, the issues, the applicable laws, and the court decisions. The writer will also determine whether the judge/jury made the appropriate decisions based on the applicable laws, determine the ethical issues of the cases, discuss whether which if not both of these cases are examples of “frivolous” lawsuits, and how the business owners might have been able to prevent these lawsuits.

What are the Facts?

In the case, Liebeck v. McDonald’s Corporation, a 79 year-old woman, Stella Liebeck, ordered a cup of coffee from the drive-thru window of a McDonald’s restaurant in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Ms. Liebeck’s grandson, Christopher, parked her Ford Probe so that she could add sugar and cream to the coffee. To perform this task, Ms. Liebeck placed the cup of coffee between her knees and pulled off the lid. During this process Ms. Liebeck spilled the entire contents of the cup of coffee on to her lap. The coffee absorbed into Ms. Liebeck’s sweatpants and severely burned her inner thighs, perineum, groin, and buttocks, (Nader & Smith, 1998). She was rushed to the hospital where the medical personnel determined Ms. Liebeck had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her body and lesser burns on over sixteen percent. For eight days, Ms. Liebeck underwent skin grafts to repair the damaged skin. According to Nader & Smith (1998), she also underwent two years worth of medical treatments from the severe burns, including debridement treatments, (p. 268).

In the case, Pearson v. Chung, the customer, attorney Roy L. Pearson, Jr., sued the owners of dry cleaner, Custom Cleaners, alleging claims for common law fraud and violations of the...