One Man Wants to Strike it Rich by Suing McDonald's

[The Yankee]

The latest from the incredibly silly lawsuit file:

link

Man allergic to cheese seeks $10 million from McDonald's

8/8/2007 8:48 AM
By Cara Bailey -Monongalia Bureau

MORGANTOWN - A Monongalia County man is seeking $10 million from McDonald's after an employee put cheese on his sandwich.

Jeromy Jackson, his mother Trela Jackson and his friend Andrew Ellifritz filed a suit July 18 in Monongalia Circuit Court against the popular fast-food chain because Jeromy Jackson is allergic to cheese.

According to the suit, Jackson, his mother and friend went to the drive-thru at the McDonald's on Chaplin Road in Morgantown on Oct. 30, 2005. Jackson claims he ordered two "Quarter Pounders" without cheese, stating he was allergic to cheese.

"From this point forward, Mr. Jackson repeatedly asked as to the status of his food and whether it had no cheese, and took multiple preventive steps to assure his food did not contain cheese," the suit says.

The suit says Jackson received his food, bit into one of his sandwiches and immediately began to have a severe allergic reaction. He was rushed to United Hospital Center in Clarksburg.

"Mr. Jackson was only moments from death and/or seriously debilitation injury when hospital staff intervened," the suit says.

Jeromy Jackson suffered injuries to his body and mind and has incurred medical expenses. Jackson, his mother and friend claim to have suffered mental anguish, pain and suffering and a loss of enjoyment of life.

The lawsuit claims the negligence of McDonald's put the lives of Trela Jackson and Ellifritz in danger also, because they were forced to rush Jeromy Jackton to the hospital under dangerous conditions.

In the four-count suit, the plaintiffs seek $10 million in punitive and compensatory damages.

In addition to McDonald's Corporation, the McDonald's Restaurants of West Virginia, Golden Arch Inc., McDonald's of Star City West Virginia, two Jane Does and two John Does are named in the suit.

Attorney Timothy D. Houston represents the plaintiffs.

Monongalia Circuit Court case number 07-C-469

So after dealing with McDonald's employees that were hard of hearing or just plain incompetent, this guy doesn't bother to double-check the order before he bites into the sandwich.

Additionally, his family is also tacking on emotional trauma to the suit even though this guy never bothered to check what he was eating. McDonald's didn't force them to race their son to a hospital when calling 911 was an obvious option.

And since the story on MSNBC prompted me to look for the original news, they also stated that the plaintiff had the burger for a fairly decent amount of time, but went into a dark environment and proceeded to bite into the burger without first checking for cheese. Additionally, they said that McDonald's already offered to pay all medical expenses for the hospital visit, which amounts to several hundred dollars.

Anyone here get the feeling he'll be enough of a pain to get McDonald's to settle for a few shekels?

 

[Godwynn]

I didn't realize that yellowish stuff on a burger from McDonald's was real cheese.

 

[Japanrocks12]

certainly not the first frivolous lawsuit involving Mc Donalds. Hell, if this scheme was infallible, I'd use it to secure millions of dollars myself.

 

[skadistic]

I didn't realize that yellowish stuff on a burger from McDonald's was real cheese.

Everything at McD's is real. Fish,chicken, eggs, beef, all of it.

Do we even have proof he got double 1/4 w/cheese?

 

[Mulholland]

I think it's ridiculous. You cant sue an entire corporation for one low level employee's mistake. Can you?

 

[Japanrocks12]

I think it's ridiculous. You cant sue an entire corporation for one low level employee's mistake. Can you?

There was this other lady who sued McDonalds for making her fat. And she won.

no matter how frivolous the lawsuit is, if its against McDonalds, you've won

 

[Mango]

A couple of points I would like to make about this case. I watched a report on it earlier today.

First, the family asked McDonalds to pay half of the $700 medical bill. McDonalds refused. Then the family hired a lawyer and asked for the entire $700 bill to be paid. McDonalds refused. These two settlement offers were very reasonable. In fact, I would have asked for the $700 first and then I would have asked for the $700 plus lawyer fees. McDonalds should have settled at $350, because by all means that was a very reasonable offer. He was accepting partial responsibility for his actions after all.

Second, there is a case of shared negligence here because he did not inspect the food before eating it. That will help McDonalds' case.

Third, cheese alergies are largest lactose-intolerence. His medical bill was only $700. He will be hard pressed to prove that his life was ever in any danger.


Now when I saw this story it was a video clip and what The Yankee wrote afterward contradicts this. Also, the claims of the lawsuit contradict the severity of the allergic reaction based on the video clip I watched, but that is to be expected. My guess is the settlement will amount to far less than $10 million, but much more than the original offer (if what I saw was true). I do not believe that he was attempting to strike it rich if what I saw was true because he made two very reasonable offers. This is just a case of McDonald's not wanting to own up to their incompetence.

 

[Mulholland]

I want to move to America and file frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit. I'll be a quadrillionaire.

 

[Mango]

Land of the free and the home of the bacon quarter-pounder.

 

[The Yankee]

Now when I saw this story it was a video clip and what The Yankee wrote afterward contradicts this. Also, the claims of the lawsuit contradict the severity of the allergic reaction based on the video clip I watched, but that is to be expected. My guess is the settlement will amount to far less than $10 million, but much more than the original offer (if what I saw was true). I do not believe that he was attempting to strike it rich if what I saw was true because he made two very reasonable offers. This is just a case of McDonald's not wanting to own up to their incompetence.

Well, even if McDonald's refused, they never forced this guy to shove the burger down his gullet. If the employees were that incompetent, then shouldn't the guy check while he's there so he can make sure he gets it right (and to return it/not pay for it)? It'd be a very different story if he had a no-cheese burger yet it touched cheese (later removed or whatever) then had the violent reactions, much like how people with peanut allergies seem to suffer effects if foods were merely processed with the same machinery.

 

[JollyRoger]

You cant sue an entire corporation for one low level employee's mistake. Can you?

Yes you can. It provides an incentive for a corporation to properly train and supervise its low level employees.

 

[The Yankee]

Is anyone else tired of the scare-tactic "Let's sue for everything they've got!" if the real goal is to claim a few hundred dollars?

Not that $10 million is all McDonald's has, but have we gone too far with the over-the-top-lawsuit strategy? How often does it work?

 

[skadistic]

When ever I ask for no pickels I check to see if its right and I just don't want them ( you get fresher food when you ask no pickles). You'd think if you were allergic you'd make sure. Unless you want to sue.

 

[nivi]

10 Millions is nothing for McDonalds, the bad press will hurt them, they will settle out of court, the man gets paid, McDonalds doesn't suffer any real consequences, everybody's happy.

 

[Mulholland]

@ Jollyroger
Anybody can forget to leave cheese off a cheeseburger. You can throw 1 billion dollars at the problem and it won't go away. People have their off days. Just check what you're eating before you shove it in your mouth. Now that is a simple solution.

 

[JollyRoger]

@ Jollyroger
Anybody can forget to leave cheese off a cheeseburger. You can throw 1 billion dollars at the problem and it won't go away. People have their off days. Just check what you're eating before you shove it in your mouth. Now that is a simple solution.

I agree and this lawsuit will probably go away before it gets to trial. However, that still doesn't change the fact that employers are responsible for the acts of their employees and should expect to be sued when their employees screw up.

 

[Head Serf]

He shouldn't have to check his food before he eats it. If you go to the grocery store and purchase a snack labeled peanut-free, and it turns out to have traces of peanut butter, is it your responsibility to check it beforehand? No, that's completely unreasonable.

 

[Japanrocks12]

He shouldn't have to check his food before he eats it. If you go to the grocery store and purchase a snack labeled peanut-free, and it turns out to have traces of peanut butter, is it your responsibility to check it beforehand? No, that's completely unreasonable.

but thats different since you can't visually inspect it without opening it. In a burger, it should be easily to visually inspect it.

 

[The Yankee]

That's different since you can't easily see that. That's why there are labels such as "The yummy bits of your Ben & Jerry's were made with the same machines that mash peanuts."

Do we need a label that says "Caution: Cheeseburger May Contain Cheese?"

 

[Godwynn]

He shouldn't have to check his food before he eats it. If you go to the grocery store and purchase a snack labeled peanut-free, and it turns out to have traces of peanut butter, is it your responsibility to check it beforehand? No, that's completely unreasonable.

There is a difference between "traces" of peanuts and a whole slab of cheese. I think with a quarter pounder there are two slices. Jesus, I cannot get a sandwich from there without the cheese being melted on the wrapper!