Florida Girl Burned By Chicken McNugget Gets $800,000 From McDonald's
A?Florida?jury?awarded?$800,000?in?damages?to?a?7-year-old?girl on Wednesday, for?her?suffering?and?emotional?anguish?when?a?chicken?McNugget?fell?on?her?leg,?inflicting?second-degree?burns.??
The injury occurred in 2019 while she was visiting a McDonald's at the age of four, and the case drew analogies to a famous and successful lawsuit filed against the fast-food business more than 30 years ago by a woman who was scalded by hot coffee.
According to court documents, a jury in Broward County awarded the girl, Olivia Caraballo, damages for pain, suffering, and other mental anguish¡ª$400,000 for the pain she endured and an extra $400,000 for any future suffering caused by the injuries.
The family's lawyers had requested $15 million. Olivia's parents, Philana Holmes and Humberto Caraballo Estevez, filed the lawsuit in state court against McDonald's and Upchurch Foods, the franchise operator in Tamarac, Fla.
McDonald's Faces Legal Consequences: 80,000 Awarded To Girl Burned By Chicken Mcnuggets
In May, a second jury found the two corporations guilty of failing to offer adequate instructions or warnings¡ªon the packaging, for example¡ªregarding the risks of injury from a Chicken McNuggets meal containing chunks of white chicken?meat.??
As of Thursday, it remained unclear whether McDonald's and Upchurch Foods would appeal the judgement. McDonald's attorneys refused to comment. Upchurch Foods' lawyers should have replied more promptly to several calls for comment. They have 15 days under Florida law to seek a new trial or 30 days to appeal.
Jordan Redavid, the family's principal counsel, stated that the jury's finding amounted to "full justice" for Olivia.
"For years, the defendants claimed that we didn't have a case and that they had no liability," Mr. Redavid said. He stated that the granted damages were far greater than the $156,000 that McDonald's lawyers had offered to the jury in their closing arguments.
Holmes bought a six-piece Chicken McNuggets Happy Meal for Olivia through a McDonald's drive-through in Tamarac, Florida, in August 2019. One of the nuggets dropped on Olivia's lap after she passed them to her kid in the back seat, leaving her thigh "disfigured and scarred," according to the initial claim. Ms. Holmes said in a phone interview on Thursday that she was "satisfied with the decision" and was glad that the jury considered her daughter's sorrow.
"I just wanted Olivia's voice to be heard," said Ms. Holmes. Mr. Redavid stated that the court will oversee the distribution of the funds given to the child, maybe through a court-appointed guardian who will propose how the money should be disbursed. He further stated that the cash will most likely be invested until Olivia reaches the age of majority.? ?
The case was compared to a well-known lawsuit regarding McDonald's, also involving a woman scalded by the fast-food restaurant's coffee. Stella Liebeck, then 79, suffered severe burns after spilling her morning coffee on her lap at an Albuquerque McDonald's drive-through in 1992.
Liebeck's action resulted in a stunning $2.9 million in damages. According to Prof. Ryan Calo, who teaches tort law at the University of Washington School of Law, the McDonald's case became a byword for excessive litigation.
Professor Calo stated that the hot?coffee?lawsuit was analogous to a conventional tort law case and had more merit than public debate had allowed, as court hearings proved that the corporation served its coffee at temperatures ranging from 180 to 190 degrees. He claimed that, despite being found partially guilty by the jury, the plaintiff was able to influence the practises of a sprawling corporate behemoth. He added that a judge later reduced Ms. Liebeck's award to roughly $640,000, finding it to be a more proportionate number.
Redavid admitted that the two McDonald's cases appeared similar at first glance: a burned customer, a boiling item, and a huge settlement from McDonald's. However, the circumstances were different, he explained. Ms. Liebeck's detractors claimed she should have recognised a hot cup of coffee. But it was tough to blame Olivia, a 4-year-old child, for failing to anticipate how hot a Chicken McNugget could be.
"This is not the infamous hot-coffee case; this is Olivia's case," Mr. Redavid and his counsel said in a statement following the verdict.
Since the 1992 case, McDonald's and many other coffee shops have resorted to using larger labels with more direct warnings on their products.?McDonald's does not currently include warning labels for its Chicken McNuggets.
Holmes is hopeful. "Hopefully, McDonald's will change their Happy Meal boxes now," she said, "to add a label or a warning that the food inside is coming right out of the fryer."
What do you think about it? Do let us know in the comments.?
For more trending stories, follow us on Telegram.
