Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SoCalCoug
Here are the facts a little more in full.
http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbus..._mcdonalds.htm
Just in the interest in assuring you have the entire story before making judgments about the woman, the case and the jury.
The funny thing to me is you made a statement about the damages not being very punitive - a little bit of circular reasoning in an argument about the damages being too high. |
Yeah, that's pretty brutal. I was a bit rash in some of my knee-jerk comments, I suppose. McDonald's deserved a lot worse than they got, according to testimony.
Quote:
|
# McDonald's witnesses testified that it did not intend to turn down the heat -- As one witness put it: “No, there is no current plan to change the procedure that we're using in that regard right now;”
|
The $480k in punitive seems about right to me from the consumer perspective but wholly inadequate in the punitive aspect(Although the recap states that there was a post verdict settlement so I don't know how that affected things). There needs to be some sort of balance about what the plaintiff gets and what adequately punishes the defendant(when the plaintiff wins) but I have no idea how to accomplish this except to give part of the punitive damages to charity or something like that.
Thanks for the info, SoCal.