Posted on 10/29/2011 7:03:01 PM PDT by CedarDave
Looks like Flo will have to take a salary cut and buy her own white uniforms!Never mind Flo. I'm so sick of those 2 gay dicks (from the other ins. company} I could puke...In fact I'm also sick of every other person/character on TV or in movies being gay I could puke.
So Roosevelt and the Bullmoose Party were communists?
Yes, progressive Republicans followed the Trotsky model; progressive Democrats followed the Lenin model.
Read my tag line.
I had a lawyer as a customer who claimed to know some details of that case. According to him, McDonalds had sent some memos around about the scalding hot coffee, but had done nothing about it. Also, the 6 million $ award(which I thought was ridiculous)was what the plaintiff showed to be McDonald’s daily profit or sales of coffee.
Just hope you don’t get hit by a driver insured by Progressive, the “General”, Safe Auto and all those other TV ad insurance companies that let you sign up immediately on-line for $35, instantly getting proof of insurance........
Mike
I don’t have to imagine.
My husband is self-employed and we depend on arrogant self-righteous progressives for our income, as well. Only a few are as powerful as the Lewis clan, but they are all the same. The responsibility for the present situation is only a matter of degree.
I'm sorry. Respectfully, that's not the standard for introduction of evidence works.
At almost every trial at which a major corporation is a party, the opposing counsel introduces some evidence that the corporation's agents committed some form of fraud. It doesn't mean that there was any fraud. It doesn't mean the judge agreed that there was fraud. Introducing evidence doesn't mean that evidence is genuine and true.
Remember the Casey Anthony trial? Do you mean the moment the judge allowed evidence that the mother was innocent, it meant that the evidence was true?
There's always conflicting evidence in a trial. Does that mean that the judge found merit in all of it and is always schizophrenic?
And judges don't order criminal investigations.
I said I'd like to know more information. A newspaper blurb written based on what the insured's attorney said is guaranteed not to be factual. It very well could be that what Progressive did is worse that what was written. First, judges don't order criminal investigations. District attorneys and/or go to grand juries and obtain indictments.
To add a little light to this myth. McDonald’s had over 700 complaints from customers about the excessive temperature of the coffee it served before the occurrence of the incident you alluded to.
The excessive temperature of the coffee was found to have a positive effect on the customers through the aroma it produced in the restaurants.
Thanks for the information. The posted article didn't contain those details - in fact, the posted article says that Progressive either didn't record or lost the calls, but it doesn't say what evidence existed at trial that the calls were, in fact, made.
I'm not sticking up for Progressive, but I also know NEVER to read a newspaper article that's based on an interview with one attorney in a trial and exepct (a) that attorney to tell the facts without spin, and (b) the newspaper reporter to understand either legal procedures or the facts of the case
A newspaper article like this - written primarily based on an interview with the plaintiff's attorney - is more of a press release than unbiased journalism.
However, whether or not it's a press release - Progressive may still be a bunch of scumbuckets.
They? Was there more than one judge?
Thanks. You were a smart consumer. That may have been the case here. That's why I said I wanted more details - because this article is primarily a press release for the plaintiff's attorney.
Which makes sense, because the drunk driving had nothing to do with whether the policy expired.
Just checked Santillanes’s political contributions. Yup, you guessed it. She donates to ‘Rats, including Barry. Wonder how much the ‘Rats get from the lawyer’s share of the payout....?
Sad, isn't it? I don't shop at Costco or eat at Arby's or IHOP. Heck, the list of places I don't patronize because I don't want my money going directly to the Democrat Party is lengthy.
Keep fighting the good fight, Terry Mross, and thanks for the reminder.
Roosevelt was a good buddy of Uncle Joe Stalin. He had several Communist Party members high in his administration, but does not seem to have carried a card himself. Still, he did Stalin’s work for him.
Teddy Roosevelt was a bit early to be called a Communist, but he came out of that same cesspit of progressivism that the Communists emerged from. He was a very mixed bag; admirable in some ways, a big-time troublemaker in others.
Every Executive at Progressive that knew or authorized this CRIMINAL FRAUD belong in PRISON, All Assets seized. The judge should have already been removed from the Bench, and then charged as a Co-Conspirator. And yes the Judge had the absolute authority to order a Criminal Investigation the very instant CRIMINAL WRONGDOING was entered into Evidence, which it was in this case. When he did not, He willfully and knowingly became a co-conspirator to CRIMINAL FRAUD.
Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson’s car when she was severely burned by McDonalds’ coffee in February 1992. Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drivethrough window of a local McDonalds.
After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee.
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
According to the case, Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, she was in the passenger seat, intending to put the creamers and sugar in her coffee. I agree, that's a pretty dumb thing to do.
You are correct. Between 1982 and 1992 (the year of this suit) some 700 injury claims were filed, some with similar 3rd degree burns. McDonalds was well aware.
"Also, the 6 million $ award(which I thought was ridiculous)was what the plaintiff showed to be McDonald’s daily profit or sales of coffee."
There was NEVER an award of that magnitude in this case. Initially Mrs. Liebeck had asked for $11,000. Which was the portion of her actual medical costs not covered by insurance. McDonalds refused. The original award was $200,000. in compensatory damages. This was later reduced to $160,000. under the assumption Mrs. Liebeck "was 20% at fault". In addition the jury's award equal to two days sales of $2.7 million in punitive damages, was likewise reduced to $480,000.
In the end the case was privately settled for an undisclosed amount rumored to be in the neighborhood of $400,000 in total. Mrs. Liebeck had offered to settle for $300.000 just prior to trial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.