Regardless of what killed her. She went in the stall and locked it. How did the proper functioning of the door cause her death. A swing and miss in the lawsuit sweepstakes!
My guess is the family knows it won’t win. They’re depending on a “go-away” settlement from BK. Unfortunately, it often makes business sense from a financial perspective.
I would not bet on it.
Several years ago I was foreman on a jury. After the case was over, the law firm asked me to be on a 'mock jury' wherein we watched two teams present an upcoming case, then our deliberations were filmed. This allowed to legal team to fine tune their presentation.
This was a liability case against a hospital which sent an emergency baby delivery case (for which they were not equipped) to a nearby hospital. There the baby was delivered. Mother and baby both survived but the baby had defects alleged to have been caused by the delivery.
Most or all of our mock jurors agreed that the first hospital was not at fault. However, about 40% argued that "The family will need millions to raise this child. The hospital is rich, plus they probably have insurance!" Another grey-haired grump and I kept pressing the points that:
1. It was not THIS hospital's fault.
2. If the hospital looses, all future patients will be paying the millions in settlement money via their increased hospital bills.
3. If the hospital looses and is insured, all future patients will be paying the millions in settlement money via their increased hospital bills.
4. In the future, Hospitals not equipped for difficult cases may nonetheless, to avoid lawsuits, may take patients which should have been transferred to a better facility. This, of course, will result in more lawsuits, more families winning the "Tort Lottery" and more 33% commissions for law firms.
Nothing could sway those "compassionate" jurors from the conviction that "that poor family will NEED the money and the (first, not at fault) hospital has lots!"
BTW, these people are allowed to VOTE!