Jury awards parents $27 million in McDonald's negligence lawsuit


#1

From the Bryan TX Eagle:
A Brazos County jury on Wednesday awarded a $27 million in a lawsuit against McDonald’s relating to the 2012 deaths of two Blinn College students.
Jurors found** McDonald’s negligence to be 97 percent responsible** for the deaths of Denton Ward, 18, of Flower Mound, and Lauren Bailey Crisp, 19, of Flower Mound, both of whom died in the early morning hours of Feb. 18, 2012.
The remaining 3 percent of liability was laid on the men who violently attacked Ward and his friend, Tanner Giesen, 21, in the parking lot of the McDonald’s at 801 University Drive.
The jury’s verdict reflects the argument plaintiffs’ attorneys made from the start of the seven-day trial: Had Ward and Giesen not been assaulted at the McDonald’s, the car accident that occurred 11 minutes later while Samantha Bean, another friend, was attempting to get the men to the hospital would not have happened.
And because of a well-documented police record of fights and assaults at the University Drive McDonald’s in the months leading up to the incident, store managers and corporate employees had a duty to hire security to protect patrons.

Honestly, I can, under the circumstances, understand some liability being awarded to the local McDonalds franchisee. 10%…sure. 25%…maybe.

But the jurors found that McDonalds was 97% responsible while the ones who actually did the beating are only 3% responsible?

The mind boggles.

Can somebody please explain to me the justice of the ones doing the beating only being 3% responsible for the damages that resulted from the beatings they did? It is, honestly, beyond my comprehension.


#2

McDonalds wasn’t protecting their employees.

If they had made measures to do so these deaths wouldn’t have happened.


#3

Deep pockets. If you held responsible the driver who caused the accident or the thugs who did the beating, you would get 100% of nothing. If you sued the police for not preventing crimes, you get nothing. If you sue a rich business for not providing a private police force that can’t prevent all crimes any better than the real police, you may get a jackpot out of sympathy for the victims.

Look for a judge who views the evidence without passion to toss this verdict.


#4

McDonald’s has money, 3 street thugs don’t.


#5

Yep. It’s all about the $$$. :frowning:


#6

Whose employees? The people killed didn’t work for McDonalds.

According to the article, the kids were drunk and had been drinking at a bar. From the article:

“Alcohol and consumption of alcohol by teenagers was the root cause,” Murphy said. “I’m not going to do a disservice to anyone and agree to some alternate reality.”
Prior to arriving at the McDonald’s, all four of the friends had been at Hurricane Harry’s drinking and left the bar in Ward’s 4Runner headed to McDonald’s.

At least two of the kids were underage, including the driver of the car that crashed. So, instead of calling for an ambulance, a drunk girl decided to drive her friends to the hospital and crashed.

And it is McDonald’s fault.

Too bad I wasn’t on that jury.

Peace

Tim

ps - I wonder why the bar wasn’t included in the lawsuit. It is illegal to serve alcohol to minors.


#7

It’s a pretty crazy situation. Maybe there’s some responsibility on the security side, but not 97%. That said you don’t know what the instructions to the jury were by the judge nor the case precedence used in the case,

Without a doubt though this will be appealed and the award will come down or even be overturned. The results of these appeals rarely make great headlines, so you don’t hear about them often.


#8

I would say that fortunately, you were not.


#9

Legal theft in my opinion. Lots of that going on today. God Bless, Memaw


#10

Not surprising. Anything that gives money to the little guy by taking it from evil corporations is a good thing, even if it isn’t.

97% liability? No honest logic can support that finding.

Peace

Tim


#11

I wonder if they could sue the local police enforcement for not having enough on duty police officers to protect the citizens?

I wonder if they could sue the assailants’ parents for doing a bad job in child raising?

I wonder if they could sue the school for a failure of instilling a civic pride in the assailants?

I wonder if they could sue the state government for failing to properly detect the danger to society these assailants posed?

I wonder if they could sue any other bystanders in the car park for not coming to their aid?

This is crazy and unjust.


#12

Since when has logic been a cornerstone of our court system? That’s how you get verdicts like the affluenza case…


#13

It will be substantially reduced if not thrown out by the appeals court. Jury felt sorry for the families involved and figure McDonalds can afford it.


#14

=abucs;12218383]I wonder if they could sue the local police enforcement for not having enough on duty police officers to protect the citizens?

No. They can’t. The Supreme Court has already determined that police are not responsible simply because they are not there. No one has an expectation of police protection. Essentially, the job of the police is apprehend perpetrators.

I wonder if they could sue the assailants’ parents for doing a bad job in child raising?

I got the impression the assailants were adults.

I wonder if they could sue the school for a failure of instilling a civic pride in the assailants?
I wonder if they could sue the state government for failing to properly detect the danger to society these assailants posed?

How far up are you willing to go? The local independent school district? The Texas Education Agency? The Texas legislature and governor? The US Dept. of Education?
The Congress and president?

I wonder if they could sue any other bystanders in the car park for not coming to their aid?

Good Samaritan laws protect those who do intervene, but they don’t require them to.

This is crazy and unjust.

I agree. While the local McDonald’s franchise holder has some responsibility here - mainly to keep thugs and scum off their property - its the thugs are own the most responsibility

Jon


#15

Maybe I don’t understand the intricacies involved here, but, if there were any blame to be had for McDonald’s, wouldn’t that belong to the individual franchise owner rather than McDonald’s corporate?

I feel like many jurors nowadays want to give people the maximum amount of money they can because they would want someone to do the same for them if the situation were reversed. :shrug:


#16

Unless McDonald’s is found to be a joint employer: online.wsj.com/articles/nlrb-decision-could-make-mcdonalds-liable-for-labor-practices-of-franchisees-1406660591

Not sure if this would climb up the chain for on-location issues, though…


#17

An Hurricane Harry’s was zero percent at fault?

In any case, I see now why fast food workers are going to need a substantial raise. They will all need to be either lawyers or have Navy Seal training, preferably both.


#18

Pockets aren’t as deep as Mickey D’s.


#19

Where do they get these juries?


#20

Aw. . . poor McDonalds.

The injustice!!

cry me a river.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.